SRI. SAJEESH.K.P     : MEMBER

    The complainants  filed this complaint  under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 for an order  directing the OP to pay the value of 6 goats Rs.51,000/- along with compensation and cost of litigation of Rs.64,000/- to the complainants for the deficiency in service on the part of OP.

      The complaint in brief :-

   According to the complaint, the complainant started a goat farm of Attachira, Wayanad.  The OP supplied goats to the farm which was constructed by them.  The OP’s agreed to supply 20 goats(19 female goat ,1 ram) and also agreed to provide a farm which has the capacity to include 40 goats. Moreover, they also agreed to provide fodder for Rs.3,75,000/- and the  assured buy back guarantee does and a ram(buck) but the insurance was not provided by OP even after the repeated demands of complainant. On.  The complainants remit Rs.2,00,000/- as first instalment for fodder and farm.  After that OP constructed a farm and provided fodder.  On 1/1/2021 complainants remitted balance amount of Rs.1,75,000/- to the OP’s bank account.  On 21/1/2021 OP gave 19 does and a ram(buck) but the insurance was not provided by OP even after the repeated demands of complainant.  On 4/6/2021, 28/6/2021,30/7/2021 three goats died.  After the  incident, OP insured 17 survival goats.  Unfortunately  before the maturity date of insurance policy, complainants lost  three goat  died various dates.  This was intimated to OP and insurance company and they told that the incident happened  before the maturity date of insurance policy and cannot provide insurance claim.  The OP was not ready to compensate the death of  6 goats even after the repeated  demands.  Hence this complaint.

      After filing the complaint, notice was issued to OP.  the notice was not served and returned with an endorsement as “Addressee left”.  Hence commission ordered steps  and complainant produced paper publication and the notice was deemed to be served and OP set exparte.

         Even though, the opposite party has  remained ex-parte, it is for the complainant to establish the allegation made by him against the  OP.  Hence the complainant was  called upon to produce  evidence in the form of  affidavit and documents.  Accordingly the complainant  has chosen to produce his affidavit along with 8 documents  as marked as Exts.A1 to A8.  The  complainant was examined as PW1.   So the OP remained absent in this case.  At the end the commission heard the case on merit.

     On the perusal of  relevant  documents produced by the complainants, the brochure which was marked as Ext.A1, clearly indicates the averments made by complainant regarding the  farm fodders, insurance features and facilities which the OP provide  for the farm.  Exts.A2 to A4 shows the payment of Rs.3,75,000/- as stated in the  brochure, towards the account  maintained by OP.  On perusing Ext.A5, it is seen that 17 goats have insured with Oriental Insurance company Ltd with policy No.443401/47/2022/50 dtd.25/8/2021.  The period of insurance quoted in the policy schedule(Ext.A5) is  from 10.47 on 25/8/2021 to midnight 24/8/2022.  As per the  affidavit Exts.A1 to A4 it is seen that the purchase of goats were on 21/1/2021 and the payment made as per Exts.A2 to A4 is 1/12/2020,1/12/2020,6/1/2021 respectively.  But the insurance policy date is on 25/8/2021.  Hence it is clear that the insurance was not made by OP as provided in Ext.A1 on the delivery date of goats but was only insured in the month of August 2021.  And as per Ext.A5 the insurance made for only 17 goats.  According to the complainant, affidavit and Ext.A1 the number of  goats provided by OP are  20 numbers.  Ext.A6 is the copy of insurance policy complainants goat  farm at Kannur.  Ext.A7 is the registered notice send complainant No.2 to OP and Ext.A8 is the postal  receipt with acknowledgment card.  The averment regarding the death of 3 goats prior to the  Ext.A5 is hence presumed to be true.  There is no evidence to prove the death of goats after insuring them and the denial of claim by insurance company on the death of goats.  Hence, the complainants are entitled to get compensation for the death of 3 goats only prior to the insurance.  The insurance company was not implead as party  and the averment of  complainants regard denial of insurance  by insurance company is not proved.  Moreover, there is no exhibits produced with regard to the denial of insurance by insurance company.  Hence the commission came in to a conclusion that there is deficiency in service from the part of opposite party with regard to the death  of 3 goats since they failed  to insure the goats as they promised in the Ext.A1.

          In the result the complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.27,000/- for the 3 goats died prior to the insurance, and also pay Rs.5000/-  as compensation and Rs.5000/- as litigation cost to the complainants  within 30 days of receipt  of this order,   failing which the awarded amount of Rs.27000/- carries interest @12% per annum from the date of order till realization. Complainants are at liberty to file execution application against opposite party for realization of the ordered amount as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts

A1-Copy of brochure

A2to A4-Copy of cash receipts

A5&A6- copy of insurance policy

A7 Registered notice

A8- postal receipt with acknowledgment card.

Sd/                                                        Sd/                                                       Sd/

PRESIDENT                                   MEMBER                                                 MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                   Molykutty Mathew.                                      Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                      /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                     ASSISTANT REGISTRAR