Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 39 (UTT)

Oriental Insurance Co. v. Vijay Kumar

2004-04-22

K.D.SHAHI, LUXMI SINGH, SURENDRA KUMAR

body2004
JUDGMENT This is an appeal against the order dated 10.12.1993 passed by the District Forum, Pauri, Garhwal whereby the Learned Forum has directed the opposite party, Oriental Insurance Co. to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) to the complainant within 15 days from the date of order and to pay interest @11 % from the date of death of the buffalo till the acutal date of payment and if the payment is not made is not made within 15 days, the insurance company shall pay interest @ 18% in stead of 14%. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant had a buffalo. It was insured on 11.09.1989 for a sum of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand). It is said that again there was renewal of the policy on 11.08.1990. The tag No. of the buffalo was O.I.C. 8638. The buffalo died on 08.09.1990. After postmortem, the claim was made but the claim was neither rejected nor the amount was paid to the complainant. 3. The insurance company disputed about the identity of the complainant by saying that there was no insurance in the name of Sh. Vijay Kumar and there was some insurance in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh. There was no renewal on 11.08.1990. However, the death of the buffalo is admitted. It is admitted that the postmortem report was received but the tag was not received, therefore the claim could not be allowed on the basis No. TAG NO CLAIM. 4. The complainant filed the complaint and after scanning the evidence of the parties the Learned Forum, held that the buffalo of the complainant has died. The identity of the complainant was also established. He may be Vijay Kumar or Vijay Singh, it makes no difference. He is son of Shri Sohan Singh" R/o. Village Kolarr Patti, Kapalisu, Pauri, Garhawal. Even otherwise, there is no. evidence on record that Shri Soh an Singh of this village has got two sons like the name of Vijay Kumar and Vijay Singh separately. 5. It is however admitted that the buffalo was injured and it was said that there was no renewal on 11.08.1990. The death of the buffalo was on 08.09.1990. If there was no renewal, it was argued by Sh. 5. It is however admitted that the buffalo was injured and it was said that there was no renewal on 11.08.1990. The death of the buffalo was on 08.09.1990. If there was no renewal, it was argued by Sh. J.K. Jain, the Learned Counsel for the appellant that there was no insurance and therefore there was no question of any payment but the insurance company itself has admitted in' its written statement in Para 1 of the additional pleas that there was one insurance on 11.08,1989 for Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand). While in Para 4 of the additional pleas, it is again admitted that on 20.08.1990 as well there was an insurance of buffalo in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh. The premium might have been paid on 11.08.1990. It might have been received on 20.08.1990 or the renewal could have been done on that date. 6. The receipt of the postmortem report is admitted. It is said that the tag was not received but the doctor has made the postmortem. He may be of the same village or may be a doctor of the different village but never the less he has made the postmortem. In hill areas, even the doctor of one area is intrusted to the work of another area as well. At any rate, the doctor has filed in the claim form and he has given the tag no. and has sent the entire papers along with the tag to the insurance company. 7. We have examined the judgment. We do not find anything for which the judgment may be interfered with. But we are surprised in the manner in which interest has been allowed. In the ruling reported in III(1996) CPJ 8 (SC), United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. M.K. J. Corporation. it has been specifically held that 2 months time may be allowed for the settlement of the claim and interest if any should be allowed after that period and too @ 12%. Therefore the order of payment of interest is to be modified. There is no provision of any penal interest that if it is not paid within 15 days. It should be paid @ 185 in stead of 14%. The order under appeal is to be modified accordingly. Therefore the order of payment of interest is to be modified. There is no provision of any penal interest that if it is not paid within 15 days. It should be paid @ 185 in stead of 14%. The order under appeal is to be modified accordingly. ORDER The order under appeal is modified to the extent that interest shall be paid from 09.11.1990 tm the actual date of payment @ 12% only. In other respects, the order passed by the Learned Forum is hereby confirmed.