Orissa

Jharsuguda

CC/108/2018

Sri, Madhab prasad Panighahi S/O- Tribikram Panighari - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNITED BANK OF INDIA, Jharsuguda Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Self

02 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JHARSUGUDA

                                                           ****************

                                         CONSUMER CASE NO.108/2018

Madhab Prasad Panigrahi,

S/o- Tribikram Panigrahi,

At: Taraikela, Po- Hirma, Ps- Badmal

Dist.- Jharsuguda, Odisha…….……………….……….…….…………Complainant.

                                                 

Versus

 

1. United Bank of India, Jharsuguda Branch,

Panigrahi Complex, 1^st floor, Beheramal,

Po- Induatrial Estate,

Ps/Dist- Jharsuguda.

 

2. The Branch Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Sambalpur Branch,

At/Ps- Ainthapali,

Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha.…………….………...…....……..Opp. Parties.

 

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                Self.

For the Opp. Party No.1                         Sri S.K. Dash, Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Party No.2                         Sri B.K. Purohit, Adv. & /associates.

 

Present:-     1. Smt. Jigeesha Mishra, President.

                     2. Smt. Anju Agrawal, Member.

 

Date of hearing- 20.10.2022                                        Date of order- 02.11.2022

 

Presented by Smt. Jigeesha Mishra, President : -

1.    The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased four numbers of cow in the year-2006 for Rs.82,000/- availing loan from Opp. Party No.1/United bank of India, Jharsuguda Branch and the cows are insured with Opp. Party No.2.  In the year-2007 two cows died on 28.11.2007 and 25.12.2007 respectively. The complainant requested the O.Ps. to give insurance amount by showing the post-mortem report but the O.ps. denied to give the claim.

2.     The O.P.No.1 appeared before the Commission but not filed his written version.

3.   The O.P.No.2 in its written version submitted that the complainant has not mentioned the policy numbers under which the cows are insured. The complainant has not come with any document to justify the claim and the complaint is barred by limitation. Both claim of two cows cannot be amalgamated in a single complaint. The complainant has paid the loan amount and obtained No Dues Certificate (NOC).                                                  

The O.P.No.2 is not deficient in its service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.perused the documents filed by the complainant. The O.Ps. have not filed any documents.  The complainant availed a PMRY loan bearing No. 1463303200076 for Rs.71,500/- on 25.03.2006 from O.P.No.1 Bank and the loan was closed on 19.09.2018 and the O.P.No.1 granted NOC on 20.09.2018.  The complainant has filed port-mortem report of one cow having Tag No. NIA/SBP/ 13427 and the cow died on 26.05.2007. The Vetenary Surgeon, Jharsuguda issued certificate on 28.11.2017.  From the health certificate of cow in Tag No.NIA/ SBP/ 13427 issued by V.S, Jharsuguda it reveals that the value of the cow is Rs.18,000/- Bovina species.  The complainant has not filed any document relating to second cow.

Basing on the filed documents the following issues are framed

ISSUES:-

1. Is the complainant barred by limitation?
2. Whether the cows are insured with the O.P.No.2 and the O.p.No.1 not taken

           any step for insurance claim and deficient in their service?

3. What relief the complainant is entitled for?

Issue No:-1 xxxx

           It is the case of complainant that under PMRY scheme cow loan was availed from O.P.No.1 and the O.P.No.1 while granting loan insured the cows with O.P.No.2.  The complainant has filed only documents of one cow having Tag No. NIA/SBP/ 13427. The concerned cow died on 26.05.2007.  From the statement of complainant it reveals that he approached the O.Ps. for claim but they denied.  The loan was closed on 19.09.2018 but no step was taken by the O.P.No.1 for claim of insurance.  Thereafter on 17.12.2018 the complaint was filed.

            No doubt after death of the cow within two years it was the duty of the complainant to file the complaint but due to ignorance and poverty and non-closure of loan he could not file the complaint.  Immediately after the closure of loan within two years the complaint has been filed.  The claim of the complainant is a part of the loan and continuing.  Accordingly, the complaint is not barred by limitation.

Issue No:-2 xxxx

          From the documentary evidence filed by complainant it reveals that the O.p.No.1 not informed the O.P.No.2 about the death of the cow having Tag No. NIA/SBP/13427 and till 19.09.2018 collected it loan outstanding from the complainant.  For the deficient service of O.P.No.1, the complainant could get his claim.  Like the collection of loan outstanding, it was the duty of O.P.No.1 to inform the O.P.No.2 about the death of the cow for settlement of claim but it failed.  As it is not informed by O.P.No.1, the O.P.No.2 denied the claim of the complainant.

            Deficiency in service of O.P.No.1 is established.  The issue is answered against the O.P.No.1.

Issue No:-3 xxxx

           From the supra discussion it is clear that the complainant is entitled for the claim partly and accordingly it is ordered;

                                          ORDER

           The complaint is partly allowed against the O.P.No.1.  For the deficiency in service the O.P.No.1 is directed to pay cost of the cow amounting Rs.18,000/- (Rupees eighteen thousand only) with 5% interest per annum w.e.f dt.26.05.2007 within one month of this order to the  complainant failing which the amount will carry 12%  interest P.A. till realization. Further the O.P.No.1 is directed to pay Rs.2000/-(Rupees two thousand only) towards cost of litigation.

 Order pronounced in open court on 2^nd November, 2022. Supply free copies to the parties.

I Agree            

1. Agrawal, Member                              J. Mishra, President.

                                 Dictated and corrected by me

 

                                        J.Mishra, President.