New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs TILAK RAJ SINGH

THIS is an appeal by the New India Assurance Company Limited. The District Forum by a majority decision has awarded compensation for three buffaloes against the insurance company whereas the President of the Forum by a minority judgment had allowed the claim against the death of two buffaloes only. The difference of opinion arose because the learned President was of the opinion that claim relating to one buffalo was barred by time. He counted the limitation from the death of the buffalo. In the circumstances of the case, the view taken by the learned President is clearly erroneous as the date from which limitation would be counted would be the date of repudiation of the claim by the insurance company. In our opinion, therefore, the majority judgment on limitation is correct.

AS regards the merits of the case, complainant''s son and Veterinary Expert was examined. Copies of the policies have been produced. Tilakraj Singh (PW/1) and Dr. Narendra Bahadur Singh (PW/2) the son of the complainant and Dr. Vinod Kumar Pandey the Veterinary Expert, in their statements have supported the claim. There is enough material on record to show that three buffaloes were insured and two of them had in fact died. Dr. Vinod Kumar Pandey (PW/3) has categorically stated that he had examined the three buffaloes earlier and given to them Tag numbers supplied by the Insurance Company. He has stated that he had examined buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. Satna/20562 and N.I.A. Satna/ 20565 on 7.12.1987. He also deposed that on 2.1.1998 he had examined four buffaloes out of which one was given Tag No. N.I.A./ 4440/4159. He further states that Tag No. N.I.A. Satna/ 20565 was lost and therefore in its place the same buffalo was given Tag No. N.I.A. 4160/4170 on 15.9.88. He further stated that on 3.12.1988 the buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. Satna/4160/4170 died and post-mortem was conducted by him. Post-mortem certificate was also issued to the Insurance Company on 6.12.88 by him. He further states that on 25.5.88 the buffalo with Tag No. N.I.A. 4440/ 4159 died. He conducted a post-mortem examination and furnished to the Insurance Company post mortem on 27.5.88. He also states that buffalo N.I.A. Satna/20562 also died and after conducting post-mortem examination the report was submitted by him to the Insurance Company through Tilakraj Singh. The witness could not be shaken in the cross-examination so far as buffaloes bearing Tag No. N.I.A./4440/4159 and N.I.A. 4160/4170. There is no doubt therefore that the Insurance Company was liable to pay against the claim in respect of death of these buffaloes. The Insurance Company has not come out with its specific objections for rejection of these claims. In the face of such categorical evidence the Insurance Company cannot be heard to say that the aforesaid two buffaloes had not died and they were not responsible for payment. In our opinion, therefore, the respondent-Tilakraj Singh is entitled to claim compensation in respect of the aforesaid two buffaloes. The only modification which is needed in the judgment under appeal in respect of these buffaloes is as regards the quantum. We find that in Ex.P-12, the claim form relating to buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. 4160/4170 the value of the buffalo claimed prior to illness was stated to be Rs. 7000/-. In Ex.P-15, the claim form relating to buffalo carrying Tag No. N.I.A. 4440/4159, the value of the buffalo prior to illness is stated as Rs. 6500/-. In the Veterinary Certificate attached to this from (Ex.P-14) the value prior to illness is stated to be Rs. 6000/-only. However, in Ex.P-16 the Animal Health Certificate relating to the same Buffalo states the cost of the Buffalo at Rs. 6500/-. The respondent is therefore entitled to claim Rs. 7000/- for buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. 4160/4170 and Rs. 6500/- in respect of buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. 4440/4159.

So far as the third buffalo is concerned the claim form and post-mortem certificate are not on record. The statement of Dr. Narendra Bahadur Singh (PW/2) in that respect if also vague. He only states that buffalo N.I.A. Satna/20562 had also died and the papers in that respect had also been given to the Insurance Company through Tilakraj Singh. There is no document to support this Dr. Narendra Bahadur (PW/2) son of the complainant has also admitted that no documents in respect of third buffalo have been produced. Thus, the claim for the third buffalo has not been proved ex-facie to be due. We are therefore, not in a position to award the claim in respect of the third buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A. Satna/ 20562.

THIS appeal is therefore partially allowed. The order of the District Forum is modified and it is directed that the complainant shall be paid by the Insurance Company/appellant a sum of Rs. 7000/- as claimed in respect of buffalo bearing Tag No. N.I.A 41601170 and Rs. 6500/- in respect of buffalo bearing Tag No. 4440/ 4159. The Insurance Company shall also pay interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of the submission of claim form till the date of payment. The payment shall be made within a month from the receipt of the copy of this order by the appellant/ Insurance Company. So far as the claim for third buffalo is concerned the complainant shall be at liberty to agitate the same before a Civil Court under the general law as we have not held finally against him but have held that no deficiency in service in respect of that claim has been proved before the Forum and before Costs of the proceedings before the Forum and before us shall be paid by the appellant/Insurance Company. Costs quantified for both the Courts at Rs. 500/-. Appeal partly allowed.