Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/1104/2010

Karamjeet Kaur Wd/o Rai Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sub Divisional Magistrate - Opp.Party(s)

Ram Karan

27 Nov 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                               Complaint No…1104  of 2010.

                                                                                               Date of institution: 23.11.2010

                                                                                               Date of decision: 27.11.2015.

 

Karamjeet Kaur widow of late Sh. Rai Singh resident of village Munda Khera, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar.                                                                                                                                                                                                …Complainant.

                                    Versus

 

1. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar.
2. Social Welfare Officer, Social Welfare Department, Yamuna Nagar.
3. Reliance General Insurance Company ltd. SCO No.135-136, Sector 9-C, Chndigarh.    

 

                                                                                                     …opposite parties.

             

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present:  Sh. Ram Karan, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

               OPs No.1 & 2 already ex-parte vide order dated 11.2.2015.  

               Sh. Rajiv Gupta, Advocate, counsel for OP No.3.     

             

ORDER

 

1                      Complainant Karamjeet Kaur  has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation on account of death of her husband under Devi Rakshak Yojna which is known as Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna.

2.                     Brief facts, as alleged in the complaint, are that husband of the complainant Sh. Rai Singh had expired on 12.8.2008 while he was sprinkling the insecticides in his sugarcane field and in this regard a DDR No.21 dated 28.8.2008 was registered in the police station Sadar, Jagadhri. A claim was lodged with the OPs under Devi Rakshak Bima Yojna known as Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as the deceased was resident of Haryana but despite perusing her case the OPs averted the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly refused to pay the same. It has been further mentioned that deceased Rai Singh was only bread earner of the family and whole family of the complainant was dependant on the deceased Rai Singh. Hence, the complainant is fully entitled to get the compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the OPs alongwith interest and litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice OPs No.1 & 2 appeared and filed their written statement and thereafter they failed to appear and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.2.2015. OPs No.1 & 2 filed their written statement mentioning therein that State of Haryana Social Welfare Department vide Notification No. 786SW(4)2008 dated 18.4.2008 launched  a  scheme namely Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna applicable w.e.f 1.4.2006 and to implement this scheme has made a payment of Rs. 17.85 crores to the Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. in lump sum to insure all the families of the State of Haryana except the deceased may not have income tax payee, Government Servant and Public Sector undertaking etc. who are covered under Group Insurance Scheme for one year w.e.f. 28.3.2008 to 27.3.2009 and in this regard a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was executed on 28.3.2008 between the Haryana Government and Reliance General Insurance Company i.e. OP No.3. It has been further mentioned that the case of the complainant was sent to the Reliance General Insurance Company vide letter No. 4049 dated 5.3.2010. Hence, there is no deficiency in service and the complaint qua OPs No.1 and 2 is liable to be dismissed.

4.                     OP No.3 appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable, time barred, there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of OP No.3, not come to this Forum with clean hands, no locus standi, not fall under the definition of consumer and all the LRs has not been impleaded as party and on merit it has been stated that insurance company was never intimated nor any claim was lodged by the complainant or the department concerned which was supposed to be lodged immediately. Had the insured lodged any claim a specific claim number would have been assigned to the same. As per Haryana Government, Social Justice and Empowerment Department Notification dated 19.11.2009 which is in continuation of the notification No. 1076SW(4)2004 dated 29.4.2004, the benefits of the scheme i.e. RGPBY will not be available and no claim will be entertained if the claim is lodged after six months of the death/accident. All further allegations that husband of the complainant died due to sprinkling of the insecticides are also denied. No postmortem report or medical treatment record to establish accidental death has been filed by the complainant. Even the DDR in question has been lodged after 12 days of the alleged accident by manipulating all the things and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint. 

5.                     The complainant failed to produce any evidence and her evidence was closed by court order on 11.2.2015. However, at the time of filing of complaint, some documents such as copy of DDR marked as Mark-A1, Photo copy of News Paper cutting Mark A-2, Photo copy of death certificate Mark A-3, Photo copy of affidavit of Karamjit Kaur Mark A-4, Photo copy of recommendation of Gram Panchayat Mundakhera dated 23.8.2008 Mark A5, Photo copy of certificate of Sharma Hospital, Jagadhri  Mark A6, Photo copy of ration card Mark A7, Photo copy of voter list Mark A8, Photo copy of letter issued by District Social Welfare Department Yamuna Nagar Mark A9, Copy of terms and conditions of MOU issued by FC Government of Haryana vide Memo No. 786SW(4)2008 dated 15.1.2008 Mark A10.

6.                     On the other hand, counsel for OP No.3 tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri Vineet Solanki, Asstt. Manager Legal as Annexure R3/X and documents such as copy of Memorandum of understanding as Annexure R3/1, Photo copy of Notification of Haryana Government dated 19.11.2009 as Annexure R3/2, Photo copy of recommendation of Gram Panchayat as Annexure R3/3, Photo copy of DDR as Annexure R3/4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.3.

7.                     We have heard learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned counsel for OP No.3 and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on  file very carefully and minutely.

8.                     It is not disputed that the husband of the complainant expired on 12.8.2008 which is evident from the death certificate Annexure A-3. The only plea of the complainant is that her husband was expired while doing spray of insecticides/ pesticides in his sugarcane field on 12.8.2008 and as per Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed between the OP No.3 and OP No.1 & 2 the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 1,00,000/- under the Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna Scheme.

9.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP No.3 i.e. Reliance General Insurance Company hotly argued at length that complainant is totally failed to file any post mortem report to establish accidental death even no medical treatment record has been filed. Further the DDR bearing No.21 dated 24.8.2008 was lodged after manipulating all the things after a period of 12 days from the death of deceased Rai Singh. It has been further stated that as per terms and conditions of the MOU and insurance policy, the complainant/department concerned was supposed to immediately informed the insurance company but in this case the insurance company was neither informed/ intimated nor any claim was lodged with it. Had the insured lodged any claim a specific claim number would have been assigned to the same. Further as per Haryana Government Social Justice and Empowerment Department Notification dated 19.11.2009 which is in continuation of Notification No. 1076SW(4)2004 dated 29.4.2004, the benefits of the scheme i.e. RGPBY will not be available and no claim will be entertained if the “ claim is lodged after six (6) months of the death/accident” which is evident from Annexure R-3/2and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint.

10.                   After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. So, the complaint is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has totally failed to file any medical record from which it can be ascertained that the husband of the complainant was died due to poisoning of pesticides/ insecticides during the spray in his sugarcane field. Further the case of the complainant creates doubt as the complainant has lodged the DDR after a delay of 12 days from the date of alleged death. Further the complainant has not filed any documentary evidence or any copy of complaint or letter issued to the Higher Authority or to Nodal Officer or the concerned Deputy Commissioner for not settling the claim of the complainant whereas the OP No.3 i.e. Reliance General Insurance Company has taken specific plea in his written statement that no claim whatsoever has been lodged by the complainant or any concerned authority with the Insurance Company and when no claim has been lodged with the OP No.3 then no question arise to make the payment to the complainant. Besides this, from the perusal of terms and conditions of the Notification dated 19.11.2009 issued by the Haryana Government bearing No. 2188-SW(4) 2009, no claim will be entertained, if lodged after six (6) months of the death/accident. It will be applicable to all the claimants that may be filed in future and also to the cases in which death/accident has occurred and claim not filed so far. Even the complainant failed to summon any record from the concerned office of the Nodal Officer that the claim of the complainant was recommended by the Nodal Officer after proper verification to the insurance company. Further the complainant filed a certificate issued by Dr. Kamal Sharma Annexure A-6 in which it has been mentioned that “ Certified that Rai Singh son of Sh. Mam Chand, resident of Village Munda Khera was brought dead in the hospital on 12.8.2008 at 12.30 P.M. “ but in the certificate it is nowhere mentioned that the deceased was died due to poisoning of insecticides/ pesticides i.e. no cause of death has been mentioned in this certificate. As the complainant has totally failed to prove the cause of death by cogent evidence and has not lodged any claim with the insurance company within the stipulated time as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy of notification and MOU, so, we have no option except to held that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

11                    Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 27.11.2015.

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG )

                                                                                    PRESIDENT,

 

                                                                                     

                                                                                    (S.C.SHARMA )

                                                                                     MEMBER.