IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 28th day of December, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 02/2022 (filed on 04-01-2022)
Petitioner : Bino Joseph,
S/o. Joseph,
Kannampurayidathil House,
Veliyannoor P.O.
Uzhavoor, Kottayam
(Adv. Prakash Pampady)
Vs.
Opposite Party : Oriental Insurance Company,
Rep. by Divisional Manager,
Rukiyabagh, II Floor,
Ravipuram, M.G. Road,
Ernakulam, Kochi - 682016
(Adv. P.C. Chacko)
O R D E R
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
The complainant is a farmer. The complainant purchased a cow by availing of a loan for Rs.50,000 from Uzhavoor branch of Kerala Garmin Bank. As directed by the bank authorities the complainant filed a proposal form with the opposite party on 30-1-2017 through the veterinary hospital to avail insurance coverage for his cow. The complainant paid Rs.5200/- towards the premium amount through the Kerala Gramin bank. The opposite party issued a policy in the name of the complainant vide policy no. 440200/47/2022/502 with effect from 6-8-2021. According to the complainant he is entitled to insurance coverage from 30-7-2021 which is the date on which he paid the premium amount. At the time of availing the policy, the cow have no illness and the opposite party issued the policy based on the certificate issued by the doctor. On 15-9-2021 the cow died due to illness. The postmortem of the cow was conducted by the doctors. Though the complainant lodged a claim with the opposite party they repudiated the same. According to the complainant, the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint is filed by the complainant praying for an order to direct the opposite party to pay the insured amount to the
complainant along with Rs.25,000 as compensation.
Upon notice opposite party appeared before the commission and filed the version as follows:
A policy was issued to the complainant insuring his cow vide livestock insurance policy no. 440200/47/2022/502 for the period from 6-8-2021 to 5-8-2021 with its terms and conditions. The sum insured under the policy is Rs.80,000/-. The said policy was issued on the receipt of the proposal form before the company on 6-8-2021. The allegation that the Ksheera Mithra policy form was filled on 30-7-2021 and remitted Rs.5200 towards premium through SBI, Uzhavoor branch is not correct. The policy can be issued only on receipt of the proposal form signed by the complainant. The opposite party is not bound to issue the policy with effect from 30-7-2017 because the proposal form was not received in the office of the opposite party and it was received only on 6-8-2021.
The third-party administrator of the policy is a necessary party to this proceedings. The said cow was under treatment for illness from 16-8-2021 till its death. As per the policy condition if the death occurred to the cow during the waiting period ie within 45 days of the inception of the policy no claim will be entertained. In this case, the death of the cow occurred on 15-9-2021 which is during the waiting period. The claim of the complainant was processed legally in terms of the policy and its conditions. The death of the cow came to the knowledge of the opposite party only on receipt of the claim form. The value of the cow stated in the cattle form is not correct. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked exhibits A1 to A7 from the side of the complainant. V. Sreejith who is the Divisional Manager of the opposite party filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked exhibit B1 to B3 from their side.
On the evaluation of the complaint version and evidence on record, we would like to consider the following points.
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties?
2. If so what are the reliefs and costs?
Point number 1 and 2
The complainant is an agriculturist. He had taken a livestock cattle insurance policy from the opposite party for his cow vide exhibit A3 policy schedule. On perusal of Exhibit A3, we can see that the said policy was valid from 6-8-2021 to 5-8-2021 and the insured sum was 80,000. Unfortunately, the cow died on 17-9-2021. Exhibit A5 is the postmortem report prepared by the veterinary surgeon, at Puthuvely veterinary hospital.
After the death of the cow, the complainant filed exhibit A4 claim form with the opposite party on 17-9-2021. According to the complainant, the opposite party repudiated the claim of the complaint without any valid reason.
The complaint was resisted by the opposite parties on the ground that the death of the cow happened during the waiting period of the policy. It is contended by the opposite party that they received the proposal form for the Ksheera Mithra policy only on 6-8-2021 and on the same day itself they issued the exhibit A2 policy schedule by insuring the cow for a sum of 80,000/-. Exhibit B2 is the original proposal form which is filed by the complainant with the opposite party for availing the livestock insurance under the Ksheera Mithra policy. On perusal of the same, it can be seen that the same was dated 30-7-2021. On a close perusal of Exhibit B2, we cannot see any endorsement on it to prove that the same was received by the opposite party only on 6-8-2021. Ongoing through exhibit B2 which is produced by the opposite party before this commission we can see that there is writing on the top of the same as 3/8/21 and in the bottom portion as R/22/538/5200/p22/502. We cannot see any endorsement or seal except these in exhibit B2. The opposite party did not produce any inward or outward register or any other document to prove the date on which they received the proposal form from the complainant. The nonproduction of such documents or register itself proves the manner in which the opposite party considered the proposal form of the complainant.
The opposite party failed to prove that they have received the proposal form only on 6-8-2019. The opposite parties have no case that they had taken time in processing the proposal of the complainant. According to the opposite party, they issued the policy in the name of the complainant on 6-8-2021 the date on which they received the proposal form. Therefore it is clear that usually, the opposite party issues the policy on the date of the proposal itself.
Exhibit A1 is the receipt issued from the SBI Uzhavoor branch that the complainant had paid Rs.5200 towards the premium to the account of the opposite party. The opposite party has no case that they do not receive the premium amount of Rs.5200/- towards the policy on 30-7-2021. We cannot believe that a poor cattle farmer paid the premium for the insurance policy much before the date on which he filed the proposal form with the insurer. An insurance policy becomes effective from the date of payment. Herein case in hand it is pertinent to note that neither in the version nor in the affidavit the opposite parties disclosed the date on which they received the payment towards the premium of the policy. Thus we are of the opinion that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service by causing delay to process the proposal form of the complainant and by not issuing the policy to him with effect from 30-7-2021.
There is no dispute on the fact that the death of the cow occurred on 15-9-2021. According to the opposite party, there is a waiting period of 45 days as per the terms and conditions of the policy. On a close evaluation of evidence we can see that if the policy is issued by the opposite party on 30-7-2021 ie the date on which they received the proposal form, the waiting period would not apply to the complainant. The opposite party cannot take any advantage over the complainant for their fault and imperfection committed by the opposite party.
The consumer protection act is benevolent legislation which is intended to protect the interest of the consumer from the deceptive practice of service providers and traders.
Considering the nature and circumstances of the case we allow the complaint and pass the following order.
- We hereby direct the opposite party to pay Rs.80,000/- ie the sum assured to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
- We hereby direct the opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
The order shall be complied with within 30 days of receipt of this order failing which the compensation amount will carry 9% from the date of this order till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 28th day of December, 2022
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Copy of receipt issued by SBI Uzhavoor branch
A2 – Copy of notice dtd.30-07-21 by opposite party
A3 – Copy of policy schedule no.440200/47/2022/502
A4 – Copy of cattle claim form issued by opposite party
A5 – Copy of post-mortem report dtd.17-09-21 issued by opposite party
A6 –Copy of valuation certificate
A7 – Copy of notice dtd.22-11-21 by Kerala Gramin Bank
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
B1 - Copy of policy schedule no.440200/47/2022/502
B2 – Proposal / veterinary certificate issued by opposite party
B3 – Letter dtd.18-10-21 issued by opposite party
By Order
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
