AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
WE are proceeding to dispose of this appeal at the stage of admission itself. The appellants herein (in short "Insurance Company") are the original O.Ps. in the aforesaid complaint and against the order dated 16th October, 2001 passed by the District Forum, Osmanabad ordering the Insurance Company to pay sum of Rs. 12,000/- plus interest against the claim of the complainant in respect of insurance coverage which according to the complainant he had obtained in respect of his cow from the Insurance Company through its Agent Shri Netaji Shivajirao Kadam r/o Tuljapur, Tehsil Tuljapur for sum of Rs. 20,000/- for which the said agent issued a Batch bearing No. NIA-97151305/24500. The complainant stated his signature was also obtained by the said agent on certain papers and he paid sum of Rs. 2,250/- as demanded by said Mr. Kadam.
AFTER death of the cow when complainant lodged the claim, Insurance Company repudiated the claim with a plea that there was no insurance coverage as such obtained as claimed by the complainant and this drove the complainant to approach the District Forum. Before the District Forum Insurance Company pleaded in the terms as mentioned herein above but explanation offered was not found acceptable to the District Forum who hold the Insurance Company being deficient and has made the award. Hence the appeal.
It is to be stated that even the complainant could not produce any record to prove the fact, in fact money paid by him to said Mr. Kadam, Agent of Insurance Company. The complainant also could not produce the receipt for the payment of Rs. 2,250/- made to said Mr. Kadam.
NOTWITHSTANDING, the District Forum has made the award without there being any proof of the insurance coverage. Such order of the District Forum cannot be sustained particularly in absence of any proof to show the existence of insurance coverage and in fact was obtained. It needs no emphasis to highlight that insurance is in par with contract and existence of contract is must in a claim of such nature.
THE complainant is appearing before us in person and we also asked him certain questions as he happens to be a farmer and what revealed by him is indeed shocking. We gather from the complainant that like him there were 7/8 victims at the hands of said Mr. Kadam in the said vicinity. However, it appears that nothing has been done to take action against said Mr. Kadam. The learned Advocate for the Insurance Company stated that the Insurance Company after receipt of the complaint called the explanation from Mr. Kadam and thereafter terminated his agency.
WE are of the view that serious note is required to be taken of the matter as like this. WE inquire from the complainant as any complaint was lodged against said Mr. Kadam. He stated he had not lodged any complaint. WE are issuing necessary directions to the District Superintendent of Police of District Osmanabad as will be indicated in the operative clause of the order for proper investigation in the light of what is stated herein above and take action, ofcourse, depending upon the outcome of inquiry. As far as this appeal is concerned, the same has to be allowed and its impugned order has to be set aside. ORDER 1. Appeal is allowed and its impugned order dated 16th October, 2001 is set aside. 2. No order as to costs. 3. WE direct Registrar of this Commission to forward the copy of the judgment to the District Superintendent of Police, District Osmanabad with a direction that he shall order the investigation in the matter against the said Mr. Netaji Kadam r/o Tuljapur and take necessary steps for registering a crime against him as also the necessary steps as required under the law. WE also direct the District Superintendent of Police to report the compliance of our directions to this Commission. 4. Office to furnish copies of the order to the parties.
Appeal allowed.