PER MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant, her husband Shri Babasaheb Baburao Chandne was an agriculturist holding Gut No.14,18 and 28 at village Kotha, Taluka-Jintur, District-Parbhani. He died accidentally on 20^th May, 2009  in motor vehicle accident. She submitted insurance claim under the Government Scheme of Shetkari Apghat Vima Yojana.  Her claim was not satisfied therefore she has filed this complaint for insurance claim of Rs.1 Lakh with interest. 

2)                The Opponent appeared and filed written statement.  It is submitted that no intimation was received by this opponent from the complainant therefore, she can not file claim before this Forum. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

3)                After hearing all the parties and after going through the record, following points arise for our consideration.

POINTS

REASONS

4) As to Point No.1 & 2 :- The complainant has produced revenue record, showing that her husband was holding agricultural land and he was farmer. The complainant also produced copies of Inquest Panchanama, Death Certificate, F.I.R., Spot Panchanama, Post Mortem Report.  On going through all these papers, it is clear that the husband of the complainant died in the motor vehicle accident.  According to the opponent, no intimation was received by this opponent from the complainant. This defence of the opponent is falsified by the information received by the complainant under the Right to Information Act, 2005.  As per information received under the Right to Information Act, 2005, claim of the complainant was repudiated by the opponent vide letter dated 21^st June, 2010 as required documents were not produced. This information shows that the defence taken by the opponent is not correct. The claim was already received by the opponent but the same was repudiated on the ground of want of required documents.  Under the Government Resolution and Tripartite Agreement, the beneficiary has to submit claim to the concern agricultural department and the concern agricultural department has to comply all the formalities i.e. necessary documents and submit to the opponents. Liability is fixed on the government agricultural department.  The beneficiary should not be suffered due to lack of the compliance within time by the government machinery. According to the complainant, the claim was submitted to the opponent government officer within time. There is no evidence on record to show that the opponent informed the complainant to produce the documents.   Therefore, the defence taken by the opponent can not be accepted. The complainant has produced all the required documents under Government Resolution and Tripartite Agreement therefore her claim can not be rejected. 

5)                The learned advocate for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment of our State Commission reported in 2008(2) All MR (Journal) 13 in the case of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited –Versus- Smt.Sindhubai Khanderao Khairnar, decided on 7^th January, 2008. In para 9 of the judgment, the Hon’ble State Commission has observed as under :

The Government declares various benevolent schemes for Agriculturists and person coming from lower strata of society. For effective implementation of the claim, Govt. prescribed simple procedure. Taking into consideration, the illiteracy in the rural areas, the liability is imposed on the Village Revenue Officer and Tahsildar for purpose of collection of necessary documents and submission of the claim to the insurance company. The success of benevolent scheme depends as to how and in what manner such schemes are implemented. Unfortunately, because of lukewarm and obstructive attitude of insurance company, genuine and honest claim of widow is defeated for no fault of her.

In the instant complaint before us also, claim form was immediately submitted to the government officer. Therefore, the claim of the complainant can not be repudiated.

6)                It is submitted by the learned advocate for the opponent, the complainant can not produce the documents at the stage of argument. The complainant has already produced the required documents along with complaint and also before filing of affidavit of evidence.   She is not filing the document at the time of argument.  Therefore, the submission made by the learned  advocate for the opponent is not relevant. 

7)                The learned advocate for the opponent has submitted that the terms of the contract has to be strictly followed by the parties.  For this purpose, she has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited –Versus- Harchand Rai Chandan Lal, decided on 24^th September, 2004.  In view of this judgment, the terms of the contract are to be strictly followed.  This fact is not disputed by the complainant. 

8)                Thus, there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the deceased was the farmer holding agricultural land. He died accidentally in the motor vehicle accident.  The complainant is a widow therefore, as per the agreement, the opponent is liable to satisfy the claim of the complainant. The complainant has complied all the formalities as required under the agreement and Government Resolution. 

         As discussed above, the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed.
2. The Opponent/Insurance Company is directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One Lakh Only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of death of the insured i.e. 20^th May, 2009  till its realization.
3. The Opponent/Insurance Company is further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rs.Three Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this proceeding.
4. The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.
5. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Pronounced on 18^th October, 2014