By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-
The complaint filed against opposite parties for getting the Insurance claim with compensation for the loss sustained to plantains due to natural calamity.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant had cultivated 1000 plantains in one acre of land out of which 50 cents belonged to the complainant and 50 Cents taken on lease from Susamma. The complainant insured this 1000 plantains with opposite party No.1 through opposite party No.2, date of commencement of policy was on 12.12.2008. The policy period was for one year. The complainant availed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from Canara Bank, Korome to
(Contd...2)
-2-
cultivate this plantains. But on 15.07.2009 during the policy period due to heavy storm and rain 709 bunched plantains were completely damaged. The plantains were just bunched so the mishap resulted in total loss. The complainant reported this incident to the opposite parties in time on 23.07.2009 the officials from Vegetable and Fruits Promotion Council, Canara Bank and the Insurance company inspected the premises and assessed the damages to the tune of Rs.28,360/-, after deducting 20% of assessed amount as per policy conditions. Thereafter several occasions the complainant approached the opposite parties but he did not get any amount. On 13.01.2011 opposite party No.2 informed the complainant that his claim was rejected by opposite party No.1 because of difference in Survey Number. The Survey Number shown in the system is 90/C1, 41, but in Claim and Verification Report the Survey Number is 41, 119/2. According to the complainant all the documents regarding the land in which complainant cultivated plantains were submitted with opposite parties. They had prepared Claim and Verification Report in printed form and the complainant do only to sign in it. If any mistake is there in any of the documents all those entries in the said report were made by the officials who visited the land and they prepared it with the help of back documents.
3. The complainant alleges that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in rejecting the claim without proper reason. So the complainant prays for an Order
directing the opposite parties to pay the amount assessed by the Surveyor that is Rs.28,360/- with interest, also he prays for Rs.5,000/- towards cost and compensation of this proceedings.
4. Notices served to both parties, they appeared and filed their version.
5. The Opposite parties filed version, in short it is as follows:- Opposite parties No.1 & 2 filed separate versions. Opposite parties admitted that the complainant had insured 1000 plantains with opposite party No.1 in survey No.90/C1 and 41. The loss sustained by the complainant is admitted by both parties. The averments that all the entries in the claim form were made by the officials with the help of back documents are denied by opposite parties. Opposite Party stated that all the bunched banana plantains were almost ripened for harvest, the value of the banana yield is not deducted by the complainant. Also the opposite parties submitted that opposite parties along with Surveyor inspected the plantain cultivated area and the damage and loss was convinced. But in the Claim form Survey number is 119/2. The liability of the opposite parties if any is limited to the 'terms and conditions, policy provisions and exceptions'. Opposite parties further submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in processing the claim of the complainant. So the opposite parties prays for the dismissal of the complaint.
6. On considering the complaint, Versions, affidavit and documents the following points are to be considered:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
7. Point No.1:- The evidence of the complainant consists of affidavit of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A4 documents. Ext.A1 is the copy of Claim and Verification Report. Ext.A2 is the Copy of Rejection slip dated 05.05.2011. Ext.A3 is the Copy of Agreement. Ext.A4 series are the the copy of Tax Receipts, perusal of Ext.A1 reveals that complainant insured 1000 plantains with opposite party No.1. Opposite parties No.1 and 2 filed separate affidavits, Opposite party No.1 is examined as OPW1 and Exts.B1 to B3 documents were marked. Ext.B1 is the Original Claim and Verification Report, Ext.B2 is the Photograph and Ext.B3 is the Insurance Application Form submitted by complainant.
8. On going through the records and evidence we find that dispute is only regarding the difference in Survey Number. The loss and damages are convinced by the officials. There is no dispute in claim. The only disputed factor is the difference in Survey Number shown in the system and claim form. Anyway Copy of Tax Receipts and Agreement are produced by the complainant before this Forum. On perusal of the documents we assume that the mistake was happened due to clerical error. We could not find any willful latches on the part of opposite parties to provide proper service to the complainant in settling the claim. Likewise the complainant complied all the formalities to process the claim. If there is a mistake in Survey Number shown in claim form, all the documents relating to this also is submitted by the complainant to opposite parties. It is clear from the Agreement and Tax Receipt that the Survey Number is 90/C1 and 41, So we finds that it is only a clerical mistake done by whom, he filled the Claim form. From this we are in the opinion that there is deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties. So complainant is entitled to get compensation from Insurance company. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
9. Point No.2:- The complainant is entitled to get the benefit of the Insurance Policy, there is no dispute regarding the Claim and damage. The dispute in Survey Number can be considered as a clerical mistake. So opposite party No.1 is directed to pay the amount assessed by the Insurance Surveyor that is Rs.28,360/- to the complainant with 5% interest from 15.09.2009 and also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards cost of this proceedings.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party No.1 is directed to pay the amount assessed by the Insurance Surveyor that is Rs.28,360/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty) only to the complainant with 5% interest from 15.09.2009 onwards till payment. Opposite party No.1 is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only towards cost of this proceedings. This Order must be complied by the opposite party No.1 within 30 days from the date of Receipt of this. Otherwise opposite party No.1 is directed to pay interest @ 5% per annum till full payment.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of August 2013.
Date of Filing:13.02.2012.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. P. C. Mathai. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
OPW1. Mathew Paul. Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Claim and Verification Report.
A2. Copy of Rejection Slip. Dt:05.05.2011.
A3. Copy of Agreement.
A4(Series). Copy of Tax Receipts.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
B1. Claim and Verification Report.
B2. Photograph.
B3. Insurance Application Form.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
