National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs SIBARAM GORAI

THIS is an appeal by the National Insurance Co. Ltd. against the order of CDF, Bankura. By the impugned order No. 16 dated 13.4.1999 the Forum directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 1,16,700/- towards compensation for the death of pigs which was insured with it together with interest @ 12% from the date of filing till payment.

THE respondent was the complainant before the Forum. He started a piggery in his village Banjora. No obtained a Cattle Insurance Policy in his name and paid premiums of varying amounts. Before the (sic.) of the risk the Veterinary Surgeon certified that the animals as prescribed in the policy were properly tagged and were in sound and good health and from all vice. He also certified that there was no contagious disease in the vaccinity and the pigs were properly vaccinated. On receiving the recommendation of the Veterinary Surgeon, the Insurance Company agreed to cover the risk of the pigs from death and also agreed to make good the loss of the petitioner in the event of death of those animals. While the policy was in force in the night of 16/17.10.1996 all the pigs of the petitioner excepting one died due to poisoning. According to the complainant the poisoning was done by some miscreants with the intention to cause loss and injury to him. On the next date, i.e. on 17.10.1996 at about 9.45 a.m. he lodged a complaint with the police, a specific case was started. He also informed the Branch Manager of the Insurance Company asking the later to compensate for such loss after proper verification. No also enclosed a certificate from the Pradhan, Banjora Gram Panchayat in support of his claim for compensation due to death of pigs. One Anupam Gangopadhyay, a Panel Loss Assessor of the Insurance Company enquired about the matter. The forensic report was also received which revealed that death of the pigs was due to poisoning. The Insurance Company having not obliged the complainant by making payment as claimed. The complainant approached the Forum.

The case was contested by the Insurance Company wherein it was admitted that the death of the pigs occurred due to poisoning. But, they repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that poisoning having been done maliciously. No claim could be entertained because of the terms and conditions of the policy. They have preferred to execution one to the Cattle of Insurance Policy in support of their stand.

IN this connection, few facts be noticed. The piggery of the complainant was insured and the policy was enforced when the unfortunate incident happened when all the pigs, but one kept in the piggery died due to poisoning. It is not disputed that the claim on the ground that it was malicious act on the part of the petitioner and so he is not entitled to get any compensation from them. IN this connection, they wanted to take the aid of proviso one to the policy which reads thus : Malicious or wilful injury or neglect over-loading unskillful treatment or use of animals for purpose over than said in the policy without the consent of the Company in writing. In this case, there is nothing on record that to show that it was the complainant himself who killed the pigs by administering poison nor which could be imagine that the complainant would kill the pigs only to get compensation from the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company has failed to establish malicious act on the part of the complainant. The reports of the Pradhan as well as Investigator would clearly show that the animals died due to poisoning and the complainant had no hand in it. It appears that the matter has been thoroughly dealt with by the Forum. We find no materials to differ. There had been deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company and as such the complainant is entitled to recover compensation which has been assessed by the Investigator.

IN that view of the matter we find no merit in the appeal which is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.