Kerala

Idukki

CC/11/206

Leelamma Varghese - Complainant(s)

Versus

United India Insurance Company Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.K.J.Thomas

28 Dec 2011

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/206
 
1. Leelamma Varghese
Kunnathu(H),Thadiyampadu.P.O
Idukki
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. United India Insurance Company Limited,
Palace Road,Mattanchery
Ernakulam
Kerala
2. The Secretary
APCOS, Vazhathoppu
Idukki
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MR. Laiju Ramakrishnan PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Bindu Soman Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

DATE OF FILING: 03.10.2011

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 28th day of December, 2011


 

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

 

C.C No. 206/2011

Between

Complainant : Leelamma Varghese,

Kunnathu House,

Thadiyampadu P.O,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: K.J. Thomas)

And

Opposite Parties : 1.United India Insurance Company Limited,

Palace Road,

Mattancherry.

(By Adv: Thomas Sebastian)

2. The Secretary,

APCOS,

Vazhathoppu.

3. United India Insurance Company Limited,

Divisional Office No.1,

Thiruvananthapuram.

(By Adv: Thomas Sebastian)

O R D E R

SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)


 

The complainant is having cattle rearing through which she earn her livelihood. The cow was insured under the Ist and 3rd opposite parties. The insurance recommendation is carried out by the 2nd opposite party. The premium is paid through Union Bank, loan provided bank. The complainant had supplied milk in the 2nd opposite party, society. The insurance scheme is " ". The complainant had two cows and took loan of Rs.50,000/-. The insured animals have ear-tag. The tag numbers are 733143-420002 and 733074-420002 respectively. In May 2010, the cow having ear tag No.733143 became ill and treated. The treatment was conducted by Dr.P.Abdul Latheef. The cow was died. Soon after the death of the cow the complainant had sent documents and claim form to the Ist opposite party through Union Bank, Idukki branch. After that the complainant had enquired the matter in Mattancherry Branch office but they replied that everything is sent to Divisional Office for processing. The complainant sent a letter to Mattancherry branch regarding the same. On 7.04.2011 the complainant had sent a petition to the Regional Office of the opposite party at Ernakulam. But no reply received. The claim is not yet received. Due to the delay the complainant could not pay the loan amount in bank. The bank charged defaulted interest of Rs.5,000/- from the petitioner. The insurance premium is duly paid and the delay for obtaining the claim amount is a deficiency of service and hence the petition is filed.

 

2. In the joint written version filed by the Ist and 2nd opposite parties, they admitted the insurance policy. The Ist opposite party had denied the acceptance of claim form. The Ist opposite party has not received any claim form and other documents, only when the notice of the forum got, they knew the matter. The Ist opposite party admitted that they received photocopy of the necessary documents again from the complainant. These documents were forwarded to the 3rd opposite party to settle the claim. The 3rd opposite party is ready to settle the claim of the complainant for Rs.25,000/-. Since the insured cow was purchased under loan from Union Bank of India, Idukki branch, as per the the policy condition, the claim can be settled only through the Union Bank of India, Idukki branch. A cheque for Rs.25,000/- drawn in favour of Union Bank of India, Idukki branch in the account of Leelamma Varghese. But the complainant is not ready to accept the amount. So the 3rd opposite party had deposited the amount before the Forum. The opposite party again submitted that the delay in settling the claim was caused since the complainant has not sent the claim form and necessary documents to settle the claim to the 3rd opposite party, the insurer of the cattle. So the alleged deficiency of service is only a baseless thing.


 

3. The 2nd opposite party also filed written version. The 2nd opposite party is the milk society, where the complainant had supplied milk. The only part of the 2nd opposite party is to recommend the complainant to Union Bank for cattle loan. The loan sanctioned through the bank, the insurance is also carried out. The death of cattle is admitted by the 2nd opposite party. The post-mortem was done by MILMA Assistant Manager Dr.Abdul Latheef is also admitted by the 2nd opposite party. The opposite party again submitted that due to the delay in loan payment, the Union Bank, Idukki branch had charged interest from the complainant. The insurance and the delay in processing the claim is not under the 2nd opposite party's control.


 

4. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

 

5. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P8 marked on the side of the complainant. No oral evidence adduced by the opposite parties.


 

6. The POINT :- Complainant examined as PW1. PW1 was cross examined by opposite parties 1 and 3. No relief is sought against the 2nd opposite party. Ext.P1(series) are copy of insurance premium receipts. Ext.P2 is copy of insurance proposal form. Ext.P3(series) are copy of letters issued from the Union Bank of India to the Ist opposite party. Ext.P4 is copy of cattle claim form. Copy of complainant' letter addressed to the 3rd opposite party is Ext.P5. Ext.P6(series) are copy of courier receipt and postage register of Union Bank of India. The dispute is regarding the cattle claim. The claim processing time is actually disputed and due to the act of the opposite parties, the processing is now delayed for one year and 8 months. This was deposed by the complainant. The opposite parties had a contention that the claim form and necessary documents were not despatched to the proper place. The complainant had sent the claim form to the Mattancherry branch. Ext.P6(series) postage register copy of Union Bank of India reveals the fact. The 3rd opposite party is the actual custodian of the policy and by mistake the claim form had sent to Mattancherry. The claim form and necessary documents are despatched through Union Bank, Idukki branch, the finance is provided by them.


 

The complainant is a poor lady finds her daily bread through cattle rearing. For purchasing of cattle, the Union Bank of India, Idukki branch had provided a loan of Rs.50,000/-. The complainant have 2 cows, among them one is died. These two cows were duly insured through Unon Bank, Idukki branch by United India Insurance Company. The United India Insurance company is a well established insurance company having branch office and Divisional office in all throughout Kerala. The insurance policy is for a risk covering. The death of cow is an unexpected risk due to which the complainant suffered financial problems. The loan from a schedule bank is became pending, the bank imposed additional interest in the defaulted period. The contention of the opposite parties to sent the claim form to Mattancherry branch caused delay for awarding the claim is not sustainable because the Ist and 3rd opposite parties are the same establishment. If a claim form mistakenly reaches to the Ist opposite party, it is the responsibility of the Ist opposite party to inform the 3rd opposite party and take urgent steps to process the claim. Here in this case PW1 deposed that a delay of one year and 8 months occurred for processing the claim and the amount has not received. In this aspect we find deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.


 

Exts.P1, P2 and P4 are the documents reveal about the insurance policy. The Union Bank postage register copy Ext.P6 mentioned the date on which the claim form despatched. Complainant herself sent letter to the 3rd opposite party, that shows Ext.P5. The opposite party had produced Rs.25,000/- before the Forum. PW1 in the chief examination stated that only after filing the case before the Hon'ble Forum the opposite party had deposited the D.D. So she objected the same. After that the opposite party filed an application and returned the D.D. The proceedings of the case shows that the case of the complainant is just and fair. So the opposite party is entitled to pay compensation to the complainant, because she paid Rs.5,000/- as interest of the loan due to the act of the opposite party.


 

In the result, the petition allowed. The Ist and 3rd opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as per Ext.P4 claim form. The Ist and 3rd opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony caused to her and also for the interest paid by her for the cattle loan and Rs.2,000/- as cost to the complainant within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.


 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of December, 2011
 

Sd/-

SMT.BINDU SOMAN)(MEMBER)

Sd/-

I agree SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)


 


 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - Leelamma Varghese

On the side of Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1(series) - Photocopy of Insurance premium receipts

Ext.P2 - Photocopy of Cattle Insurance Proposal Form

Ext.P3(series) - Photocopy of letters issued from the Union Bank of India to the Ist opposite party(2 Nos)

Ext.P4 - Photocopy of Cattle Claim Form

Ext.P5 - Photocopy of complainant's letter dated 7.04.2011 addressed

to M/s.United India Insurance Company Limited Grievance,Regional Office, Ernakulam

Ext.P6(series) - Photocopy of courier receipt and postage register of Union Bank India

Ext.P7 - Photocopy of Postal Receipts(2 Nos)

Ext.P8 - Photocopy of Delivery Voucher

On the side of Opposite Party :

Nil

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 
 
[HONABLE MR. Laiju Ramakrishnan]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Bindu Soman]
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.