By. Sri.Ananthakrishnan. P. S, President:

            This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2.   The Complainant’s case in brief is as follows:-

The Complainant is a farmer. He is the owner of 60 cents of property in Sy.No.15/2010 of Thavinjal Village. The Complainant used to cultivate ginger and plantains in this property.  In the year 2018, he planted 500 banana plants in this property. He insured these crops from 13.12.2018 to 12.12.2019 with the first Opposite Party through the second Opposite Party. Ten months thereafter, on 21.08.2019, due to flood, all the banana plants of the Complainant has been damaged. He informed the damage to both Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the Surveyor of first Opposite Party inspected the property without giving any information to the Complainant or second Opposite Party. So, the Complainant took photos and sent claim form to the first Opposite Party for getting the insurance claim.  Many months thereafter, the first Opposite Party sent a cheque for Rs.28,000/- to the Complainant directing him to sign in the attached affidavit which contained a statement that the Complainant received the full and final settlement of the claim.  The Complainant insured the crops for Rs.50,000/- at the rate of Rs. 75/- for the un bunched banana and Rs.100/- for the bunched banana.  Since, all are bunched banana, the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.100/- per each plants.  Without noting this fact, the first Opposite Party has only sent a cheque to the Complainant for Rs.28,000/- as full and final settlement of the claim. So, there is deficiency in service on the part Opposite Parties.  Hence this complaint to get Rs.50,000/- towards the insurance claim with an interest @12% per annum from 21.08.2019 and Rs.10,000/- towards compensation.

3.  The second Opposite Party is ex-parte. 

4.  The first Opposite Party filed version which in short is as follows:- 

They admitted that the Complainant had insured his 500 banana plants with this Opposite Party.  They also admitted the flood occurred in the year 2019 and all the plantains of the Complainant have been damaged.  They sent surveyor when they received the claim form from the Complainant. The surveyor found that all the banana plants attained its harvest period. So the surveyor calculated the claim amount for 500 plants at the rate of Rs.100/- per each and after deducting salvage value @ 30% which amounts to Rs.15,000/- from the total claim and policy excess @ 20% from the balance amount which amounts to Rs. Rs.7,000/-, he reached into a conclusion that the Complainant is entitle to get Rs.28,000/-only. So, according to the recommendation of the surveyor, the first Opposite Party sent a voucher for Rs.28,000/- to the Complainant. Thus there is no deficiency of service on the part of this Opposite Party. The Complainant returned the cheque. Therefore, he is not entitled to get any interest from the first Opposite Party and the claim of the Complainant for Rs.50,000/- is to be rejected. They denied that they have assessed Rs.28,000/- as insurance claim without any norms.  So, the Complainant is not entitled to get Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum and Rs.10,000/- towards compensation. Hence, they pray to dismiss the complaint.

5. On the above pleadings, the points to be considered here are

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?
2. Reliefs and costs.

6.  The evidence in this case consists of oral testimonies of PW1, OPW1 Ext.A1, A2 series and Ext.B1 to B4. There is no oral evidence from Opposite Parties. Both sides heard.

7. Point No.1:- The Complainant’s specific case is that due to the flood of 2019, his 500 banana plantains were damaged and since he insured this plantains with first Opposite Party, he is entitled to get Rs.50,000/- from them as the insurance claim.  But, his grievance is that the first Opposite Party has sent only a cheque for Rs.28,000/- towards the insurance claim. According to him, it is against the norms. The first Opposite Party admitted that the banana plantains of Complainant were damaged due to the flood of 2019 and since this crop was insured with them, he is entitled to get insurance claim.  But, according to them, the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.28,000/- only towards the insurance claim as per the recommendations of their Surveyor. On perusal, it can be seen that the surveyor though assessed Rs.50,000/- towards loss, he deducted Rs.15,000/- @ 30% as salvage and Rs.7000 @20% as excess amount. It is an admitted fact that the Complainant insured the crop for Rs.50,000/- and according to him, he is entitled to get Rs.50,000/- because, he lost his entire plantains. 

8. PW1 has given evidence claiming Rs.50,000/- towards the insurance claim with interest @ 12% per annum. He also claims Rs.10,000/- towards compensation.  The surveyor of Opposite Party has given evidence as OPW1. He deposed that the Complainant has only entitled to get Rs.28,000/- after deducting salvage value @ 30% from the total claim and excess @ 20% from the balance amount.

9. Ext.A1 is the copy of the claim form given by the Complainant to the fist Opposite Party and Ext.A2 series are the copy of the photographs of the property of the Complainant which contains the damaged plantains.  There is no dispute that the Complainant insured his plantains for Rs.50,000/- and all his Plantains were damaged due to flood of 2019. Ext.B1 is the original claim form given by the Complainant. Ex.B2 is the report of the surveyor. Ext.B3 is the policy schedule.   Ext.B4 is the Voucher which has been sent to the Complainant by the first Opposite Party to put his signature when he accepts the cheque for Rs.28,000/-. 

10. As we already stated, admittedly, the Complainant insured his 500 plantains for Rs.50,000/- and he lost his entire plantains in the flood on 21.08.2019.  But, as per Ext.B2, the report of the OPW1 shows that even though, OPW1 assessed the actual loss as Rs.50,000/-, he found that the Complainant is only entitled to get Rs.28,000/- because he deducted 30% as salvage value and 20% as excess from Rs. 50,000/-.  But, no where stated that the first Opposite Party is entitled to deduct 30% from the total claim as salvage value.  Ext.B3 would go to show that first Opposite Party is entitled to deduct 20% as excess. But, Ext.B3 does not show that they are entitled to deduct 30% as salvage value from Rs.50,000/-.  Therefore, they failed to assess the compensation of the Complainant in a right way.  They have only entitled to deduct 20% as excess.  If we calculate in such a way, the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.40,000/- after deducting 20% towards excess which amounts to Rs.10,000/-. So there is deficiency in service on first Opposite Party.  Therefore they are also liable to pay compensation to the Complainant.  He wants Rs.10,000/- towards compensation. But, it is excessive. Therefore, he is entitled to get a reasonable amount of Rs.5,000/- towards compensation.

            11. The second Opposite Party is only a mediator. The Complainant took insurance from first Opposite Party through second Opposite Party.  The second Opposite Party also forwarded the claim form of the Complainant to the first Opposite Party. They have not done anything more. So, they are not liable to pay anything to the Complainant.  Thus the point is answered accordingly in favour of Complainant.

12.Point No.2:- Since we found Point No.1 accordingly, the Complainant is entitled to get the relief from the first Opposite Party alone.

In the result, the complaint is allowed. The first Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) to the Complainant with an interest @ 6% per annum from 21.09.2019 till realization. They are also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as compensation to the Complainant. It is clarified that the first Opposite Party is liable to pay these amount within one month from the receipt of this order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 31^st day of August 2022.

Date of Filing:-01.07.2020.

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the complainant:-

PW1.              Shaju Joseph.                                                          Agriculture.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

OPW1.          Mohammedkutty. K. M.                                      Surveyor (Insurance).

Exhibits for the complainant:

A1.                  Copy of Claim and Verification Report.                                  

A2(a).                        Copy of Photograph.

A2(b).                        Copy of Photograph.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

B1.                  Claim and Verification Report.

B2.                  Surveyor Report.                                                   Dt:31.10.2019.

B3.                  Copy of Policy Schedule.

B4.                  Voucher.

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

                                                                                   Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                  CDRC, WAYANAD.