Insurance Claim Against Death Of Cow, Pratapgarh District Commission Directs United India Insurance To Pay
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pratapgarh (Uttar Pradesh) bench comprising Yashwant Kumar Mishra (President) and Smt. Mamta Gupta (Member) held United India Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. liable for wrongfully repudiating the insurance claim for the insured cow which died due to illness. The claim was repudiated only based on a different identification number written in...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pratapgarh (Uttar Pradesh) bench comprising Yashwant Kumar Mishra (President) and Smt. Mamta Gupta (Member) held United India Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. liable for wrongfully repudiating the insurance claim for the insured cow which died due to illness. The claim was repudiated only based on a different identification number written in the surveyor report. The District Commission, based on the evidence presented, established that it was a mere typing error which led to the confusion.
Brief Facts:
Mr Lallan Sharma (“Complainant”) got his black cow insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (“Insurance Company”). The Insurance Company attached an identification tag on the cow's ear, numbered 854550. Two months after the availing of the insurance policy, the Complainant's cow fell ill and died subsequently. A postmortem was held and the cow's ear, along with the identification tag, was cut and submitted to the Insurance Company. Subsequently, the Complainant submitted the claim for the insurance amount from the Insurance Company. However, the claim was rejected on the basis that the surveyor report mentioned '844550' instead of '854550' as the identification number of the ear tag. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh (“District Commission”).
The Complainant contended that the Insurance Company's surveyor intentionally wrote the wrong identification tag number in the report so that the claim could be repudiated. On the other hand, the Insurance Company contended that there was no proof that the designated cow had died because apart from the identification tag number, even the colour of the cow was different.
Observations by the Commission:
The District Commission noted that the Complainant owned 2 cows. The Complainant only insured one cow which was black. The District Commission went into the merits of the question of whether or not the Complainant possibly had a 3rd cow which was also black. However, based on the evidence presented, it concluded that the insured cow which was black was the one who died. Consequently, the District Commission held that prima facie, it could be concluded that the surveyor made a typing mistake while writing the surveyor report and changed the identification number to '844550' instead of '854550'.
In light of these findings, the District Commission directed the Insurance Company to disburse the insurance amount, that is, Rs. 45,000/- and pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation along with 9% interest to the Complainant.
Case Title: Lallan Sharma vs Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Case No.: Complaint No. 63/2021
Click Here To Read/Download The Order