Kerala

Idukki

CC/11/198

K.M.Sibi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Divisional manager - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.V.C.sebastian

28 Oct 2011

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/198
 
1. K.M.Sibi
Kuzhimattathil(H),Kuzhitholu.P.O
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Divisional manager
United India Insurance Co. Ltd,Divisional Office, III Floor,L.M.S.compound,Trivandrum
Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MR. Laiju Ramakrishnan PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Bindu Soman Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

DATE OF FILING: 06.09.2011

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 28th day of October, 2011


 

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

 

C.C No. 198/2011

Between

Complainant : K.M.Sibi,

Kuzhimattathil House,

Kuzhitholu P.O,

Kuzhitholu – 685 551,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: V.C.Sebastian)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Divisional Manager,

United India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Divisional Office – 1,

3r Floor, Child Welfare Complex,

L.M.S Compound,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695 033.

2. The Secretary,

Anyartholu Milk Producers Co-operative Societies Limited,

APCOS, Reg.No.49-D,

Kuzhitholu P.O,

Kuzhikkandam,

Idukki District.

O R D E R

SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)


 

The petitioner had obtained his livelihood from cattle rearing. He had insured his cow under the scheme of " " on 19.08.2009. The insurance period is upto one year. The cattle belongs to eartag No.109586 of Brown coloured was under treatment through the 2nd opposite party. The cow was treated by Dr.Latheef, the Project Officer of the 2nd opposite party. From 25.06.2010 to 1.07.2010 the cow was under treatment. On 1.07.2010 the cow was died. The died cow had an insurance of Rs.20,000/- under the Ist opposite party, the policy had been taken through the 2nd opposite party. The cow was yielding 13 letters milk per day at the time of death. As per the yield the market value of cow was Rs.30,000/-. The death of cow was duly intimated to the Ist opposite party by Dr.Latheef, and the same doctor had conducted the post-mortem. On 19.08.2010 the petitioner had sent claim form with documents to the Ist opposite party. After that the complainant had tried to contact the opposite party in many times but have no effect. Then the complainant had sent a letter to the Ist opposite party for enquiry. After that on 22.03.2011 the opposite party had given a letter to the complainant stating that post-mortem certificate is not included in the claim form. So the complainant again sent a copy of post-mortem certificate to the Ist opposite party. But the opposite party have not given any response to the complainant's claim form. So he filed this petition demanding the insured amount along with cost and compensation.

2. The opposite parties were absent. No written version filed. Hence made exparte.


 

3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?


 

4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P8 marked on the side of the complainant.


 

5.The POINT :- The petitioner was examined as PW1. Ext.P1 is the insurance proposal form. Ext.P2 is the Veterinary Certificate. Ext.P3 is copy of claim form. Ext.P4 is the copy of letter issued by the Ist opposite party to the complainant. Ext.P5 is copy of death report of the cow given by the Project Officer to the Ist opposite party.. Ext.P6 is copy of a postal AD Card. Ext.P7 is a letter form the Ist opposite party dated 22.03.2011. Ext.P8 is another postal A.D Card.


 

PW1 is an ordinary agriculturist. He insured his cow under the Ist opposite party for an amount of Rs.20,000/-. Ext.P1 is the proposal form of insurance. The cow was under the treatment of Dr.Latheef, APCOS Project Officer. Ext.P5 is the death report of the cow given by Dr.Latheef. The cow was died on 1.07.2010. The complainant had sent claim form on 19.08.2010 which shows Ext.P3. Again the opposite party intimated the complainant for post-mortem report on 22.03.2011, that is Ext.P7 letter. After that the complainant again despatched the concerned documents to the opposite party. The postal receipt Ext.P8 reveals the fact.


 

After that the opposite party never responded the petitioner. The petitioner was waiting till 5.09.2011, the date on which this petition filed, for getting the insurance amount of the cow. The opposite party never challenged the contentions raised by the petitioner. So we think that it is a gross deficiency from the part of the opposite party that the poor cattle farmer was waiting for getting the money, or settling the matter, but the opposite party neither repudiated the claim nor settled the same. So we think that the complainant is entitled for cost and compensation. The notice from the Forum is duly accepted by the opposite party but not present before the Forum. The Ist opposite party is the insurance company and the 2nd opposite party is the Secretary of Milk Society. Both opposite parties are responsible in the matter of delay caused for the insurance claim. So we think that the prayer of the complainant is just and fair. The Ist opposite party is the insurer of the cow. It was insured through the 2nd opposite party. No relief has been sought by the petitioner against the opposite party and no evidence has produced against the 2nd opposite party. So the Ist opposite party is liable to pay the amount and the compensation.

 

Hence the petition allowed. The Ist opposite party is directed to pay the insurance amount as per Ext.P1 with 12% interest within 30 days to the complainant. The Ist opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as cost and Rs.2,000/- as compensation to the complainant within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.


 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of October, 2011


 

Sd/-

SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)


 

Sd/-

I agree SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)


 


 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - K.M.Sibi

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Nil

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1 - Photocopy of Cattle Insurance Proposal Form

Ext.P2 - Photocopy of Veterinary Certificate

Ext.P3 - Photocopy of Claim Form

Ext.P4 - Photocopy of letter dated 19.08.2010 issued by the Ist opposite party

Ext.P5 - Photocopy of letter dated 1.07.2010 issued by the Project Officer,

R.A.I.C, Kattappana to the Ist opposite party regarding the death of cow

Ext.P6 - Photocopy of Postal A.D Card

Ext.P7 - Photocopy of letter dated 22.03.2011 issued by the Ist opposite party

Ext.P8 - Postal AD Card

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Nil


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 
 
[HONABLE MR. Laiju Ramakrishnan]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Bindu Soman]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.