Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/253/2021

Manjeet - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Rajeev Sangwan

21 Oct 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI

                                                              Complaint No.: 253 of 2021.

                                                              Date of Institution: 27.09.2021.

                                                               Date of Order: 21.10.2024

Manjeet son of Sh. Mahender Singh, resident of village Kanheti, Tehsil & Distt. Charkhi Dadri

                                                                   …...Complainant.

                                      Versus

1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd  having its head office 87 MG Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 through its Managing Director.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. having its Regional Office 312700, NH-5/R-2, Badshah Khan Chowk, Faridabad-121001, through its Regional Officer/authorized signatory.

…...Opposite party.

                   COMPLAINT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.

Sitting:        Hon’ble Shri Manjit Singh Naryal, President,

                   Hon’ble Sh. Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member,

Present:       Shri Rajeev Sangwan, Advocate for complainant.  

Shri SK Sharma, Advocate for the OPs.

ORDER

1.                The case of the complainants in brief, is that he was owner of a Murrah Buffalo which was insured from opposite parties for a sum of Rs.40,000/- vide insurance policy 31270047190400000341 for the period w.e.f. 27.09.2019 to 26.09.2020. It is further alleged that the opposite party inserted an ear tag No.160050035953 in the ear of the insured Buffalo. Unfortunately, the Buffalo of complainant died on 22.05.2020 due to chronic intestinal tract infection (Johne’s Disease) and Post Mortem was conducted on 23.05.2020 by the Veterinary Surgeon, Govt. Veterinary Hospital, Bhagvi. It is further alleged that complainant informed the opposite parties regarding death of Insured Buffalo and submitted all the requisite documents and OP no.2 assured the complainant to reimburse the insured amount after due verification  of genuineness of the documents. After completion of formalities, no attention was paid by opposite parties in the matter even on several visits. The complainant sent an email with attachment of application regarding releasing insured amount on Email address

2.                Opposite parties on appearance filed the contested written statement and contested the claim of the complainant on the sole ground that no treatment was given to the buffalo during its illness from 29.04.2020 to 22.05.2020. However, the OPs had agreed that the complainant insured his buffalo from the OPs vide policy no. 31270047190400000341. Vide intimation dt.22.05.2020, the said buffalo was reported to be dead on 22.05.2020. Shri. R.S.Sharma, Investigator was deputed as Surveyor, who conducted the spot inspection and investigation and submitted his report dt.30.05.2020. From perusal of post mortem report, it revealed that the insured buffalo became ill on 29.04.2020 and died on 22.5.2020. No treatment during the illness was taken from the Veterinary Surgeon and no paper regarding treatment have been furnished alongwith death claim as such no such insurable interest exists as per terms and conditions of the policy. So, the insurance claim was rightly repudiated on 21.08.2020 and as such, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.

3.                The complainant in support of his case has filed his affidavit Ex.CW-1/A and documents Ex. C1 to Ex.C-11 and closed the evidence on 11.01.2023.

4.                 On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered affidavit Ex.RW-1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex. R14 and closed the evidence on 21.02.2024.

5.                We have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties. All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

6.                The ld. Counsel for the complainant contended that the claim of the complainant was wrongly closed as “No Claim” by the Ops vide letter dated 21.08.2020 (Ex.R5), so it has no effect on the rights of the complainant, hence, he is legally entitled to claim the compensation.

7.                After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and having gone through the material available on the records, we are of the considered view that the complaint of the complainant deserves acceptance, as there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.  It is admitted fact that complainant was owner of a Buffalo which was insured with the OP company and ear tag bearing No.160050035953 was issued by the OPs. The sole contention of the OPs in terms of terms and conditions of the policy if any insured animal is sick its proper treatment is necessary. In the present case, the buffalo was sick for a month for which no treatment was taken and as such the claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated. In our view, the plea taken by the respondent is wrong and cast doubt on the OPs that they have taken this ground only to repudiate the claim of the complainant. The complainant has placed on record a certificate  dated 23.05.2020 (Ex.C5) issued by
Veterinary Surgeon, I/c Government Veterinary Hospital, Bhagvi- wherein it has been certified that treatment of buffalo of Shri Manjeet (the complainant) was done at GVD, Kanheti  from 29.04.2020 to 21.05.2020. Treatment chart was also mentioned on that certificate. The OPs have ignored the said certificate with intention to repudiate the claim. The complainant has placed on record Ex.C1 photo stat copy of Health Certificate, Ex.C3 Post Mortem Report. From the perusal of post mortem report, it is revealed that the buffalo died having Ear Tag No. 160050/035953 which was issued by the OPs. Furthermore, the name of owner of the insured Buffalo in the post mortem report has clearly been found mentioned as Manjeet son of Shri Mahender, resident of village Kanheti, PO Bhagvi, Tehsil and District Charkhi Dadri (Complainant).  Therefore, the plea of OPs is not acceptable. The complainant has also placed on record a certificate/undertaking dt. 23.05.2020 vide which it has been certified by the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Kanheti that the buffalo of complainant died on 22.05.2020. The above said certificate/ undertaking was also signed by Nambardar and several witnesses of the same village. No contrary evidence has been placed on record by the OPs to rebut the case of the complainant. The cattle claim-Investigation report dated 30.05.2020 (Ex.R6) carried out by Sh. R.S.Sharma, Surveyor and Loss Assessor appointed by the OPs find the claim genuine and the facts mentioned in the said report corroborating the facts and averments  of the complainant.

8.                In the light of above mentioned facts and documents placed on record, the complainant is entitled to get the insured amount along with interest.  So, in these circumstances we are of the considered view that the claim of the complainant was wrongly repudiated. As such the complainant has suffered the mental as well as physical agony and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Therefore, the complaint of the complainant is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to:-

1. To pay Rs.40,000/- i.e. insured amount along with interest       @ 9 % p.a. from the date of repudiation i.e.21.08.2020.
2.  To pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation towards pain and mental agony.
3. To pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.

                    The above order be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt this order, failing which further simple interest @12% per annum will be paid by the OP for the delayed period till its realization. 

9.                If the order of this Commission is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to file execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which provides punishment of imprisonment for a term which shall not less than one month, but which may extend to three years or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees, but which may extend to Rs. one lac or with both. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules and this order be promptly uploaded on the website of this Commission. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.