United Insurance Co. Ltd. vs NAJIBULLAH ANSARI

THIS appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , is directed against the order dated 27.11.2001 in Complaint No. 124/2000 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ambikapur (hereinafter called the ''District Forum'' for short) whereby the appellant insurer was directed to pay the assured amount of Rs. 15,000/- with interest thereon as also cost of the complaint to the complainant/respondent.

ACCORDING to the complainant/respondent No. 1 he had purchased a Buffalo from the respondent Bank and insured the same with the appellant/insurer under policy No. 98/8083 for the period from 19.3.1998 to 18.3.1999. The claim of the insured under the said policy was however, repudiated by the appellant insurer on 25.11.1999 on the ground that the report of death of the buffalo was not given within 24 hours, as stipulated under the policy. The complainant in his complaint averred that when the insured buffalo had died on 24.12.1998, the complainant was not in the village and had gone away to Bihar, therefore, he could not lodge the intimation with the appellant insurer in time. However, his brother-in-law Badre Alam intimated about the death to financier State Bank of India (SBI) which in turn intimated the appellant/insurer. It was also averred that the post-mortem of the buffalo was conducted by Dr. S.P. Singh. The complainant averred that his claim was repudiated on technical ground by the respondent/insurer.

The complaint was resisted by the appellant insurer. It was mainly averred that the report was lodged belatedly, as a result of which the appellant insurer could not get the investigation made regarding the identity and could not verify the fact of death of buffalo. It was, therefore, averred by the respondent that the claim was rightly repudiated by it.

LEARNED District Forum held that there is no justification for repudiating the claim by the insurer and accordingly directed that the assured sum of Rs. 15,000/- along with interest and cost be paid to the complainant. It appears that the appeal is filed belatedly on 11.1.2002 i.e., with a delay of about 15 days. An application for condonation of delay has been filed. The reasons for delay as averred in the application for condonation of delay are that the appellant insurer''s clerk had gone on leave after locking the almirah. However, the name of the clerk and the period during which he remained on leave is not mentioned. It is further stated in the application that after receiving the file, the case was sent to the Counsel who took some time to study and to prepare the appeal. However, it is not stated specifically as to when the file was handed over to the Counsel and how much time was required by him to study and prepare the appeal. Vague and general allegations as above without giving details would not constitute sufficient cause for delay. The delay cannot be condoned on such averments. In view of the above, this appeal deserves to be dismissed as barred by limitation. However, we would now proceed to briefly examine the appeal on its merits also.

LEARNED Counsel for appellant insurer submitted that the complainant Najibullah who obtained the policy did not intimate about the death of buffalo within 24 hours as stipulated between the parties. It was submitted that as a result of belated report by the insured, the appellant insurer could not make proper investigation and inquiry regarding the death of the buffalo and its identity. It was, therefore, submitted that learned District Forum erred in awarding the amount under the insurance, in favour of the complainant. None appeared for the respondents while arguments were heard in this appeal, despite notice served on them. On perusal of the record it is clear that the fact of death of buffalo was intimated by the brother-in-law of the complainant Badre Alam as the complainant himself had gone out of station. It would also appear that the post-mortem of the buffalo was conducted by Dr. S.P. Singh, Assistant Vetinary Surgeon, Ambikapur. Tag number of deceased buffalo was mentioned in the post-mortem report by Dr. S.P. Singh. He has reported that the death of the buffalo occurred on 24.12.1998. The post-mortem was conducted on 25.12.1998. A Panchnama was also prepared by the Sarpanch of the village and signed by many Panchas, which is on the record of District Forum, which indicates that buffalo of the complainant died on 24.12.1998. Tag number has been mentioned in the said Panchnama also.

IN view of the material as above, there remains little scope for doubt regarding the averments of the complainant, that the insured buffalo died on 24.12.1998 and the post-mortem was done by the Assistant Vetinary Surgeon. The intimation of the incident though was made late on 30.12.1998, but it is probably because the complainant himself had gone out to Palamu, Bihar. The delay in report could not be treated as fatal to the claim of the complainant/respondent. Hence the complaint was justifiably allowed by the District Forum.

ACCORDINGLY, this appeal being without substance is dismissed. The parties shall bear their own cost of this appeal. Appeal dismissed.