By Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:-
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the Opposite party to pay Rs.20,000/- to the Complainant being the insurance policy amount with 18% interest and Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The Complainant purchased 15 Buffalo Calf from Bhrammagiri Project for a sum of Rs.1,55,000/- on 16.07.2013. The Complainant then insured these 15 Buffalo calfs for a sum of Rs.10,000/- each to one buffalo as sum assured with Opposite party. The Opposite Party issued policy to the Complainant wide No.101601/47/13/01/ 000000209. The Complainant then took the buffalo calfs to Kuttiyamvayal for grassing and feeding. On 19.09.2013, after feeding the buffalo, when the Complainant counted the buffalo, he found that two buffalo calfs are missing. Complainant's helper one Mr. Ramanan searched for the buffalo for two days but not found. The neighbours informed that the buffalo calfs may be taken away by some wild animals and may be eaten by them. The Complainant then informed this incident the Veterinary Doctor and doctor gave a letter to the Opposite Party for claim. The Complainant handed over the letter to the Opposite Party and collected claim form from Opposite party. The Veterinary Doctor filled up the claim form and gave to Opposite Party on 23.09.2013. In order to conduct postmortem as per rule to get insurance the Complainant and his neighbour Monsi conducted a search inside the Forest and found two ear tag and legs of two buffaloes. The Veterinary doctor conducted Postmortem and gave certificate. But the Opposite Party repudiated the claim. The repudiation of claim is illegal since the complainant grassed the buffaloes in private land and the buffaloes were taken by wild animals from private land to the Forest. Aggrieved by them, the complaint is filed.
3. On receipt of complaint, notice was issued to Opposite party and Opposite Party appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version, the Opposite Parties admitted insurance and the buffaloes bearing ear tag No.7882 and 7899 also included in it. The Opposite Party stated that the Complainant had not taken steps to safeguard the insured animals for its protection as per terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. The Complainant got the ear tag, head and legs of buffaloes from the Forest. As per the certificate of Forest Range Officer, no such incident is reported on 19.09.2013. In the postmortem report, the veterinary doctor reported that “No carcass was fully available for Postmortem examination”. The Complainant deliberately and negligently left the insured animals out side the residential premises of the Complainant in the Forest and it is a violation of clause 5 of the policy condition. Hence repudiated.
4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration.
1 Whether there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite party?
2. Relief and cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A5 are marked. Opposite Party also filed proof affidavit and examined as OPW1 and Exts.B1 to B8 are marked. The case of the Complainant is that the buffalo calfs were grassing in the private land at Kuttiyamvayal and the wild animals attacked this buffalo calfs from private land and two calfs were taken to the Forest and had eaten. No eye witness are there to the incident even though one Mr. Ramanan was grassing the buffalo calfs. Mr. Ramanan did not see incident and is not examined before the Forum. The incident is not reported to Forest department. In the cross examination of Complainant ie PW1, PW1 deposed that the address shown in the Insurance policy is the address at Kuppadithara. The Buffalo calfs are grassed at Kuttiyamvayal which is 5 kms away from Kuppadithara PW2 who is a Veterinary Doctor deposed before the Forum that he examined the parts of ear tag and ear part of buffaloes from the Private Land adjacent to Forest land. PW3 is a witness produced by the Complainant deposed that the ear tag, ear parts, legs, heard of buffalo calfs are found inside the Forest and in that spot there were some visible signs of attack. The complainant did not produce any evidence to prove that the buffalo calfs were attacked and taken to the Forest by wild animals from the private land. On the contrary, PW3 clearly deposed that the attack was happened inside the Forest. If the buffalo calfs were grassed inside Forest, it is a violation of policy conditions. On perusal of entire evidence and documents, the Forum found that the Complainant failed to prove that the buffalo calfs were attacked from private land. As per conditions 5 of insurance policy, the insured shall ensure every animal insured to have sufficient and proper feed, water and shelter and shall keep secure at tenees yards, sheds and stabbling. Here the buffalo calfs were attached inside Forest and it is a violation of policy conditions. In case of violation of policy condition, the Insurance company is not liable to pay insurance policy amount to the insured person. So the Forum is of the opinion that there is no deficiency of service from the part of Opposite party. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since point No.1 is found against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled to get cost and compensation.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 10th day of February 2015.
Date of Filing:11.03.2014
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
/True copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Joseph. K.K. Complainant.
PW2. Jayakrishnan Veterinary Surgeon, Dispensary, Padinjarathara.
PW3. Monsukutty. Agriculture.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
OPW1. Naveen Palliyal. Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Branch Kalpetta.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Complaint.
A2. Copy of Letter. dt:29.01.2014.
A3. Copy of Description of Animal. dt: 05.10.2013.
A4. Copy of Claim Foram.
A5. Copy of Post Mortem Examination. dt:05.10.2013.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
B1. Cattle Insurance Policy.
B2. Application Form dt:16.07.2013.
B3. Description of Animal. dt:05.10.2013.
B4. Application Form dt:16.07.2013
B5. Certificate. Dt:11.12.2013
B6(a) copy of Letter. dt:06.11.2013.
B6(b) copy of Letter. dt:06.11.2013.
B7. Description of Animal dt:05.10.2013.
B8. Letter. dt:29.01.2014.
