Maharashtra

Gondia

CC/15/31

MALAN WAMAN NEWARE - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

MR.UDAY KSHIRSAGAR

18 Feb 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GONDIA
ROOM NO. 214, SECOND FLOOR, COLLECTORATE BUILDING,
AMGOAN ROAD, GONDIA
MAHARASHTRA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/15/31
 
1. MALAN WAMAN NEWARE
R/O.POST-MOHAGAON (TILLI), TAH.GOREGAON
GONDIA
MAHARASHTRA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER
R/O.DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.130800, NEW INDIA CENTER, 7 TH FLOOR, 17-A, KUPREJ ROAD, MUMBAI-400001
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., THROUGH REGIONAL MANAGER
R/O.DR.AMBEDKAR BHAWAN, M.E.C.L. COMPLEX, SEMINARY HILLS, NAGPUR-440018
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
3. TALUKA KRUSHI ADHIKARI, GOREGAON
R/O.GOREGAON, TAH.GOREGAON
GONDIA
MAHARASHTRA
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. ATUL D. ALSI PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. VARSHA O. PATIL MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:MR.UDAY KSHIRSAGAR, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: MR. LALIT LIMAYE, Advocate
ORDER

( Passed on dated 18th  February, 2016 )

Per Shri Atul D. Alsi – Hon’ble President.

              The complainant has filed a complaint case for Insurance Claim under Farmer Accident Claim after rejection of Insurance Claim by District Agriculture Officer, Gondia.

2.            The story in short as under:-

              The husband of complainant Mr. Waman Sadhu Neware died on 06/06/2013 due to drowning and by profession as a agriculturist having agricultural land at Palkheda, Tah. Goregaon,  Dist. Gondia  being Gat No. 482/1, Tah.  Goregaon, Dist. Gondia.

3.            The complainant had submitted Insurance Claim before O. P. No. 3.  The O. P. No. 3 forwarded the insurance claim to District Agriculture Officer, Gondia.  But, the same was returned to the complainant without forwarding to the insurance company for adjudication, by stating the reason of delay for one year.  This communication was not communicated to complainant till filing of case hence the complainant pleaded that the complaint is in limitation and compensation may be awarded in favour of complainant.

4.            The complaint is admitted and notices are issued.

5.            The O. P. No. 1 filed preliminary objection for dismissal of complaint stating that the complainant can’t approach to forum directly.  The insurance claim was never be submitted before the Insurance Company.  The O. P. No. 3 ought to forward the claim before Cabal Insurance and thereafter to Insurance Company.  Hence, proper approach as per G.R. is not followed hence case be dismissed.

6.            As per petition and arguments and documents filed on record following points came for consideration:-

Sr. No.

Points

Findings

1.

Whether the complaint is maintainable?

NO.

2.

What Order?

As per final order.

REASONING & FINDINGS

7.            The complainant had filed Insurance Claim before O. P. No. 3 on 16/09/2014.  The O. P. No. 3 had forwarded the claim to District Superintendent Agriculture Officer, Gondia.  But, the District Superintendent Agriculture Officer, Gondia had returned the Insurance Claim to O. P. No. 3 vide letter No. 3057/2014, dated 01/10/2014 for the reason the submission of claim there was delay of one year hence it can’t be forwarded to O. P. No. 1 Insurance Company.

8.            As per Government Resolution, the O. P. No. 3 and O. P. No. 2 shall send the Insurance Claim with appropriate documents to O. P. No. 1 for adjudication.  The power and authority for admissibility and non admissibility of insurance claim has not been given to the District Superintendent Agriculture Officer.  The District Superintendent Agriculture Officer has authority only in respect of collection of documents of accident and submission to nodal officer.  The District Superintendent Agriculture Officer should not apply his mind for the merits and de-merits of claim.  His job is just like as paper collecting agent & not more than that.   The District Agriculture Officer has no authority to return the claim papers to complainant through O. P. No. 3.  The non-receipt of Insurance Claim by O. P. No. 1 is not rejection of Insurance Claim.  Hence, for adjudication of Insurance Claim, claim must be submitted to Insurance Company.  Hence, the complainant’s case is dismissed with a direction to submit the Insurance Claim again to O. P. No. 3 along with documents for adjudication of Insurance Claim as per Government Resolution passed by Government of Maharashtra.

              Hence, complaint deserves to be dismissed as per following order.

-: ORDER :-

1.            The complaint is dismissed with direction to file Insurance Claim again with O. P. No. 3 along with requisite documents for further process according to Government Resolution within two months from the date of this order.

2.            No order as to cost.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. ATUL D. ALSI]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MS. VARSHA O. PATIL]
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.