Haryana

Karnal

55/2014

Parmod Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Smt. Pushpa

13 Jul 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                           Complaint No.55 of 2014

                                                               Date of instt.3.3.2014

                                                               Date of decision: 23.07.2015

 

Parmod Devi wife of Sh.Dharambir Singh resident of 59-A, Sanjeevpuram, Gali No.1. Phoshgarh Road, Karnal.

                                                                   ………….Complainant.

 

                                                          Versus

The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch office, Grade House, GT Road, Karnal.

.

                                                                   ………..Opposite Party.

 

 

                   Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                   Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma……….Member.

                  

 

 Present        Sh.D.P.Raman Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Gurmit Singh Advocate for the OP.

ORDER:                    

 

                     This complaint has been filed by the complainant U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, (hereinafter referred to be as the Act)  on the allegations that  her cow of black and white colour was insured with the Opposite party  ( in short OP) and insurance tag No. NIA - 0251  was provided for that cow, but the tag  had misplaced, therefore, the OP gave new tag No. NIA-074 for the said cow.  On 26.11.2013 said cow died  during treatment and post mortem on the dead body of the same was got conducted.  The complainant submitted claim form to the OP, but her claim was repudiated vide letter dated 9.1.2014 on the ground that at the time of treatment of the cow, there was no tag. Thereafter,  complainant sent complaint to Head Office on 21.1.2014, and also issued notice dated 25..2.2014 to review the order after clarifying the mis- understanding regarding point No. 13, but to no avail. The complainant has claimed the insured amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest thereon.

 

2.                On notice, OP put into appearance and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Preliminary objections have been raised that complaint is not maintainable as the same neither  contains prescribed information nor has been filed in prescribed manner as per Act;   that the complaint has not been  verified as per law; that the complainant is estopped  from filing the present complaint by her acts and conduct and  that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and decide the complaint.

 

                   On merits, it has been submitted that complainant approached the OP with malafide intention while the cow was ill and there was  no tag in the ear of the cow.  Moreover,  cow was not got treated from the Veterinary Surgeon, which was the violation of the insurance policy. It has further been averred that case of the complainant was got investigated from the independent investigator Sh.V.P.Grover and on the basis of report of investigator, the  claim of the complainant  was validly and legally repudiated, vide letter dated 9.1.2014

 

3.                In evidence of the complainant, she filed her affidavit Ex.C14 and documents Ex.C15 and Ex.C16 have been tendered.

 

4.                On the other hand in evidence of the OP, affidavit of Shri  D.K.Sarin, Divisional Manager Ex.OW/A and documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O3 have been produced.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

6.                     The parties are not at dispute regarding insurance  of black and white colour cow and providing Tag No.  NIA-0251 for the said cow at the time of insurance. The complainant has alleged that tag No.NIA – 0251 had mis placed and  then, OP issued new tag  No. NIA-074.  This fact has been established from copies of insurance policies Ex.C4 and Ex.C5. Copy of the letter dated 13.11.2013 shows that complainant  had approached OP on 23..11.2013 for affixing new tag in place of tag no.NIA-0251 and making entry of the new tag in the record.  Copy of  letter dated 20.11.2013 Ex.C11 for providing  the new tag has also been produced. Ex.C5 shows that new tag was issued on 25.11.2013.  The cow had died on 26.11.2013 and post mortem on the dead body of the same was got conducted on  27..11.2013.

 

7.                The learned counsel for the OP has laid much emphasis on the contention that Investigator appointed by the OP submitted report, which showed that  complainant approached the OP  with malafide intention  for  providing new tag for the insured cow while the cow was already ill and there was no tag in  her ear.  In case of insurance of the cattle, it is settled principle that if there is no tag in the ear of the cattle at the time of death, no claim can be paid regarding death of such cattle.  It has further been argued that there is no evidence that the complainant got treated the cow and such act on her part was   violation of the insurance policy. Therefore, insurance company is not liable to pay the claim to the complainant and her claim has been validly and legally repudiated.

 

8.                 It is worth pointing out  at the very out set that OP has  placed reliance upon the report of investigator for repudiating the claim of the complainant. This fact has been reflected in the letter of repudiation of claim Ex.D1. However, neither such report has been placed on record nor affidavit of said investigator has been filed.  Thus, the OP has not been able to prove that at the time of providing new tag No. NIA-074,  cow of the complainant was ill or  that new tag  was  not found fixed in the ear of insured  cow. It is admitted fact that new tag No. NIA-074 was provided by the OP for the insured cow on 25.11.2013.  The copy of the report of post mortem report Ex.C3 indicates that  veterinary surgeon conducted the post mortem on the dead body of the cow having black and white colour bearing Tag No. NIA- 353601-074. OP has led no evidence worth the name, which may show that identification marks  of the cow mentioned in the post mortem report  did not tally with the identification marks mentioned in the health certificate issued  at the time of issuance of the insurance policy.   As per opinion of the doctor cow  died due to acute Pneumonia.   There is nothing on  the record which may suggest even inference that cow was ill even on the date when the complainant had moved application for issuance of new tag or that the complainant did not get the same treated for the ailment. A milching cattle is an asset to a family in villages, because the same is considered as a means to earn bread and butter for the family apart from using the  milk for nourishment of the family members.  A man of ordinary prudence cannot be negligent regarding treatment of illness of milching cattle and  would leave no stone unturned to save his milching cow. Therefore, it cannot be believed that the complainant did not get treated her cow.

 

                   In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the OP cannot be accepted. Consequently, the order of OP repudiating the claim of the complainant in respect of insured cow, which died on 26.11.2013, is not legally justified. Thus, there was deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

 

9.                In view of the foregoing discussion, we  accept the present complaint and direct the OP to make the payment of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 3.3.2014 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.5500/-  for the mental agony and harassment caused to her together with  legal fee and litigation expenses. The OP shall make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:23.07.2015                                                                            

                                                               (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.

                  

 

 

 

 Present        Sh.D.P.Raman Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Gurmit Singh Advocate for the OP.

 

                   Arguments heard. For orders, the case is adjourned to 23.7.2015.

 

Announced
dated:22.07.2015                                                                            

                                                               (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.

 

Present         Sh.D.P.Raman Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Gurmit Singh Advocate for the OP.

 

                    Vide  our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

 

Announced
dated:23.07.2015                                                                            

                                                               (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.