Haryana

StateCommission

A/579/2015

IFFCO TOKIO GEN.INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJWANT KAUR - Opp.Party(s)

RAJNEESH MALHOTRA

30 Nov 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      579 of 2015

Date of Institution:      10.07.2015

Date of Decision :       30.11.2015

 

1.     IFFCO-Tokio General Insurance Company Limited, IFFCO Sadan, C-1, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi.

2.     IFFCO-Tokio General Insurance Company Limited, IFFCO, Corporate Office 4^th & 5^th Floors, IFFCO Tower, Plot No.3, Sector 29, Gurgaon, Haryana (Both 1 & 2 represented through authorized signatory)

                                      Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 & 2

Versus

 

1.      Rajwant Kaur wife of late Shri Devinder Singh, Resident of Village Salpani Khurd, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

Respondent/Complainant

2.      The Jhansa Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited, Jhansa, District Kurukshetra, through its Manager.

                                      Respondent No.3

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member   

 

Present:               Shri Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate for appellants.

                             Shri Madan Jassal, Advocate for respondent No.1.

                             Shri Sultan Singh-Clerk, for respondent No.2. 

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

This appeal of IFFCO-Tokio General Insurance Company Limited (for short ‘the Insurance Company’)-Opposite Parties No.1 and 2, is directed against the order dated 25^th May, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby complaint filed by Rajwant Kaur-complainant/respondent No.1, was accepted issuing direction to the Insurance Company as under:-

“….we accept the present and direct the Ops No.1 & 2 to make payment of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lac) as death claim to the complainant under the policy in question alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint till actual realization, within a period of 30 days. We also direct Ops No.1 & 2 to further pay an amount of Rs.5000/- to the complainant as compensation for harassments etc including litigation expenses.”    

2.      Devinder Singh (since deceased)-husband of respondent/complainant was a member of The Jhansa Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited (for short ‘the Cooperative Society’)-respondent/opposite party No.3. An Insurance Policy (Annexure-B) was purchased by Indian Farmers and Fertilizer Co-Operative Limited (IFFCO) from the Insurance Company, known as ‘Kisan Gramin Bima Yojana’ for the farmers, that is, the purchasers of IFFCO Fertilizer. Complainant’s husband purchased 61 bags of IFFCO Urea and 10 bags of DAP, from The Jhansa Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited-respondent/opposite party No.3, vide receipt (Annexure-A) dated 2^nd December, 2009. He died on December 20^th, 2009 in a road side accident at Pipli Chowk, G.T. Road, Pipli, District Kurukshetra. Autopsy of the deceased was conducted at Lok Nayak Jai Parkash Hospital, Kurukshetra, vide Annexure-C. The complainant filed claim Annexure-D with the Insurance Company but it did not pay the insured amount to the complainant. Hence complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed before the District Forum seeking direction to the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.1.00 lac.

3.      The Opposite Parties contested complaint. The Insurance Company in its reply stated that as per Clause No.A(7) of the policy, the risk cover was to commence from 31^st day the purchase of fertilizer for a period of 12 months. The deceased had purchased fertilizer on December 2^nd, 2009 and he died on 20^th December, 2009, that is, within 30 days from the date of purchasing the fertilizer. So, complainant’s claim was not covered under the policy.

4.      Vide impugned order the District Forum accepted complaint issuing direction to the appellants/opposite parties No.1 and 2, as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order.

5.      Learned counsel for the appellants/Insurance Company has urged that as per terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, the claim filed by the complainant was not covered under the policy. In support, reference was made to Clause 7 of the policy, which reads as under:-

                   “7.     Period of Cover:

Risk under the “SANKAT HARAN” Bima policy shall incept from the 31^st day of purchase of any branch of IFFCO fertilizer, as mentioned in the Cash Receipt or Debit memo and shall remain in force for a period of 12 months calculated from the 31^st day of issue of cash receipt or debit memo.”

6.      Indisputably, IFFCO fertilizer was purchased by complainant’s husband on 2^nd December, 2009 vide receipt (Annexure-A). He died on December 20^th, 2009, that is, after 18 days and the period of 30 days had not expired. In view of this, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation. The District Forum has failed to appreciate this legal position and as such the impugned order cannot sustain.

7.      For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.

8.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 30.11.2015

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL