BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.            

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 208 of 2013                                                                        

                                                           Date of Institution         :   22.11.2013

                                                          Date of Decision   :    1.3.2016

Kulwant Rai, aged 38 years son of Sh.Darshan Singh, r/o village Rampura Bishnoian, tehsil Dabwali distt.Sirsa.

                      ….Complainant.                     

                    Versus.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, Sirsa, District Sirsa through its Branch Manager at Sirsa.

                                                                                              ...…Opposite party.

          Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SMT.GURPREET KAUR GILL ………PRESIDING MEMBER.

                       SHRI RAJIV MEHTA                   ……MEMBER.     

Present:       Sh.Vishnu Bhagwan,  Advocate for the complainant.

      Sh.Rakesh Bajaj, Advocate for the opposite party.

ORDER

                   Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant got insured his 7 cows and 3 buffaloes with opposite party vide insurance policy no.261503/47/13/11 for the period w.e.f. 11.4.2012 to 10.4.2015 for the  sum insured as itself detailed in the policy i.e. Rs.50,000/- each cattle. Before insurance health certificates have been issued by the Veterinary doctor for each cattle. As alleged, one of insured cattle died on 6.6.2012 during the currency of insurance period. Post mortem of the cattle was got conducted and information about the death was given to opposite party. Ops vide letter dated 14.1.2013 repudiated the claim on the ground that “the deceased cow is not the same which was insured. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                In reply, it is pleaded by the opposite party that the deceased cow was not insured with the opposite party and they rightly repudiated the claim.

3.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Ex.C1-his own supporting affidavit; Ex.C2-affidavit of Virender; Ex.C3-policy schedule; Ex.C4-veterinary certificate; Ex.C5-PMR; Ex.C6-physical verification certificate; Ex.C7-repudiation letter; Ex.C8-affidavit of Dr.Gian Parkash, Veterinary Surgeon; Ex.C9 to Ex.C15-Health Certificates; whereas, the opposite party has tendered Ex.R1-affidavit of Sh.S.K.Malhotra, Branch Manager.

4.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

5.                It is admitted fact that the complainant got  insured  total 10 animals i.e. 7 cows and 3 buffaloes with the opposite party vide insurance policy no.261503/47/13/11 for the period w.e.f. 11.4.2012 to 10.4.2015 and paid sum of Rs.24,000/- as premium. Tags were fixed at the spot after health certificates. As alleged by the Ops that the deceased cow was not the same which was insured by the company because tag was not affixed properly and it seems that the tag was tagged on that day i.e. on the date of post mortem. On the other hand, from the various documents on record, complainant successfully proved that the deceased cattle was insured with the Ops. The veterinary surgeon of Govt. hospital, Goriwala submitted his affidavit Ex.C3 on the record. In the affidavit, it is stated by the doctor very clearly that he had examined the milch cattle breed Hferon, Colour white, Black with one she-calf of one week old produced by Kulwant Rai s/o Sh.Darshan Singh, r/o village Rampura Bishnoian, tehsil Dabwali, distt.Sirsa. He had issued the Health certificate no.0443300 for this cattle. He while posted as Veterinary Surgeon at Govt. Veterinary hospital, Goriwala also conducted post mortem of above cattle on 6.6.2012 vide sr.no.6110 and at that time, the Tag No.OIC23210/1427 was affixed in the ear of dead cattle. Beside it, description of the cattle in health certificate Ex.C9 and PMR Ex.C5 are similar and through these documents, it is clearly established on record that cattle died on 6.6.2012 was one of the cattle which has been insured by the Op company. On the other hand, except affidavit of Branch Manager of the company, there is nothing to prove the case of the Op. 

6.                From the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that complainant has successfully proved his case. As such, complaint is accepted  with cost of Rs. 2000/- . Op company is directed to pay the sum insured for the died cattle i.e. Rs.50,000/- to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within a period of one month, otherwise the complainant would be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 22.11.2013 till actual realization. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                 Presiding Member,

Dated: 1.3.2016.                      Member.              District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Sirsa.