Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 32 (UTT)

New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Urmila Devi

2003-03-20

K.D.SHAHI, SURENDER KUMAR

body2003
JUDGMENT 1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 13th June, 2002 passed by the District Forum, Uttarkashi whereby the claim of the complainant for compensation of Rs. 9000/- along with interest on the death of his buffalo has been allowed against the Insurance Company. 2. The complainant has purchased a buffalo for Rs. 9000/- . It was insured. He has taken loan from District Co-operative Bank, Opposite Party No.1 and the insurance was from the opposite party No.2. On 05-11-2000, the buffalo died. It is alleged that the complainant gave the information to opposite party No.1 immediately. The claim of the complainant has been repudiated by the Insurance Company on the ground of delay in information and also on the ground that the tag was not on the ear of the alive buffalo but it was placed on the dead body, and also on the ground that the identity of the dead buffalo with the insured could not be established. Then, the complainant filed the complaint. 3. The learned Forum allowed the complaint and the same pleas were raised by the Insurance Company in this appeal as well. The learned Forum has given a very detailed judgment and on facts we are satisfied that the case of the complainant was proved. In a' detailed and reasoned order, the grounds of allowing the compensation has been given. We do not want to repeat the same but regarding the delay in information, the complainant is a resident of a small village in the hilly area. He immediately informed the bank through which the insurance was done. He has informed the bank immediately. If there was any delay from the bank side, the complainant is not to suffer because the bank is the agent of the Company'. 4. As regards the identity of the dead buffalo, although post-mortem report has not been filed, but the doctor, who has made the post-mortem has filled in the form and has given a signature. He has given the identity of the cattle, the age the details, there is nothing to disbelieve that. It is alleged that cause of death has not been given. There is no case of the Insurance Company that the cattle died out of any other reason than sudden illness. He has given the identity of the cattle, the age the details, there is nothing to disbelieve that. It is alleged that cause of death has not been given. There is no case of the Insurance Company that the cattle died out of any other reason than sudden illness. The Insurance Company has filed a report of the alleged expert doctor who has not examined the dead body of the cattle. He has given his opinion on the basis of papers. We do not find any reason to interfere with the finding recorded by the 'learned Forum. There is no force in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. ORDER There is no force in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. Costs easy. 1ad v. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Singh 763 was done. He has informed the bank immediately. If there was any delay from the bank side, the complainc;mt is not to suffer because the bank is the agent of the Company. 4. As regards the identity of the dead buffalo, although post-mortem report has not been filed, but the doctor, who has made the post-mortem has filled in the form and has given a signature. He has given the identity of the cattle, the age, the details, there is nothing to disbelieve that. It is alleged that cause of death has not been given. There is no case of the Insurance Company that the cattle died out of any other reason than sudden illness. The Insurance Company has filed a report of the alleged expert doctor who has not examined the dead body of the cattle. He has given his opinion on the basis of papers. We do not find any reason to interfere with the finding recorded by the learned Forum. There is no force in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. ORDER There is no force in this appeal and the appeal is accordinglydismissed. Costs easy.