JAIRAM KHATIK Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petitionhas been filedbyJairam Khatik, Petitioner herein, being aggrieved by the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission') in Appeal No. 216/2003 in which the National Insurance Co. Ltd. was the Respondent.

(2.) The facts of the case according to the Petitioner are that after completion of training in the rearing of pigs, he was sanctioned a loan of Rs. 1 lakh from the District Industries Centre which he spent on purchasing 35 pigs, construction of sheds for them and purchase of fodder etc. Petitioner also insured the pigs with the Respondent/Insurance Company. Six pigs died in the month of August and September. 1995 due to an illness because of which he suffered a loss of Rs. 18,000. He forwarded the necessary documents including the post-mortem report, to the Respondent/Insurance Company which however, has not made the payment till date. On 22.10.1995, i.e. on Diwali, there was a fire in the premises where the pigs were lodged. 11 big pigs and 7 small pigs were burnt alive, 19 of them ran away and 12 pigs could not be traced. In this manner, Petitioner suffered a further loss of Rs. 1 lakh A complaint to this effect was made to the police. Petitioner could not get the post-mortem of the dead pigs done since they had been burnt and, therefore, were disposed of by throwing them away. Further, Petitioner was busy trying to trace the pigs who had run away and hence the 5 days delay in filing the claim with the Respondent/Insurance Company for Rs. 1 lakh due to the loss of pigs in the fire. However, this claim was also not settled and, therefore, Respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum requesting that the Respondent be directed to pay the Petitioner Rs. 1,18,000 for the pigs that he had lost in the fire as well as earlier and which were insured by the Respondent/Insurance Company.

(3.) Respondent on the other hand stated that the above contentions of the Petitioner are not factually correct Regarding the death of 6 pigs in the month of August and September, 1995, Respondent contended that the Petitioner did not forward the necessary documents to the Respondent/Insurance Company including the post-mortem reports as well as the ear-tags of the dead pigs despite several reminders and. therefore, the claim of the Petitioner was declared as no claim. Further, Petitioner had only got 19 pigs insured at Rs. 38.860 and not all the pigs as claimed by him. Regarding the death of the pigs in the fire on Diwali night, although the report was received 5 days late, a Surveyor was appointed who confirmed the death of only 11 pigs who were burnt in the fire. It is. however, not correct that a number of pigs had fled and many of them were not subsequently traced. Even in the case of dead pigs, the required post-mortem report and ear-tags were not sent as requested for by the Respondent in order to settle the insurance claim. The Respondent was, therefore, justified in not indemnifying the Petitioner's claim.