Back
A/1339/2019
Date of filing :31.07.2019
Date of order :10.12.2021
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL
COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO. : 1339 OF 2019
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 01 OF 2019
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : HINGOLI
Lalita Laxman Lakhade,
R/o Rameshwar, Tq.Aundha Nagnath,
Dist.Hingoli.
…APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.
Having office at Station Road, Parbhani,
Tq. & Dist.Parbhani,
Through it’s Branch Manager.
2. Jaika Insurance Brokerage Pvt.Ltd.,
2nd floor, Jayka Building, Commercial Road,
Civil Line,Nagpur – 440 001.
3. The Taluka Agriculture Officer,
Taluka Agriculture Office, Aundha Nagnath,
Tq. Aundha Nagnath, Dist.Hingoli.
…RESPONDENTS
CORAM : Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial
Member.
Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.
Present : Adv. D.P.Mundhe for appellant,
Adv. K.M.Loya for respondent No.1,
Adv.S.K.Labde for respondent No.2.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 10/12/2021)
Per Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25.06.2019 passed
by District Forum , Hingoli in C.C.No.01/2019 org.complainant has
preferred this appeal.
A/1339/2019
2.
The appellant is the complainant and the respondent No.1 to 3 is the
opponent No.1 to 3 in complaint No.01/2019 before District Consumer
Dispute Redressal Forum. The appellant and respondent are hereinafter
referred to as ‘complainant’ and ‘opponent” as per their status in the
complaint and District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum is referred to
as ‘District Forum’ for the sake of convenience.
(3)(i) It is the case of complainant that her husband Lakshman Sakharam
Lakhade was returning from Aundha Nagnath to his home on 31.10.2017 in
evening after day to day business on his motorcycle, when a speedy
oncoming truck dashed to his vehicle and he was grievously injured and was
further taken to Government Hospital at Aundha Nagnath and was further
taken to one 'Nirmal Hospital 'at Nanded, where he was treated for 2 to 4
days and later was shifted to Kamalnayan Bajaj Hospital at Aurangabad.
However, during the treatments there he died on 03/11/ 2017. The dead
body was also referred for Post-mortem.
(ii)
The deceased was having agricultural land in his name. The
complainant submitted the insurance claim under Gopinath Munde
Farmer’s Accident Insurance scheme to opponent No.3 Taluka Agricultural
Officer, Aundha Nagnath. It was informed to the complainant that
documents are forwarded to opponent No.1, Insurance Company through
opponent No. 2 broker company. The complainant was inquiring with
opponent No.3 Agricultural Officer. However, she was informed that her
claim will be settled. The Insurance Company has not settled her claim till
the filing of the consumer complaint. The opponents have thereby caused
A/1339/2019
deficiency in service towards the complainant. The complainant filed
consumer complaint seeking directions to the opponents to pay Rs.2 lacs
under insurance scheme with interest. The compensation towards agony
and cost is also sought.
(4) The opponent Insurance Company filed written statement before the
District Forum and denied the rival allegations. It was replied that the
complainant did not submit the valid and effective driving licence of the
diseased. The Insurance Company has repudiated the complainants claim
on this ground. In additional statement , it is replied that complainant has
not come with clean hands and has suppressed many material facts. That,
FIR is lodged after 28 days after the death of deceased, no reason is given for
delayed lodging of the FIR. It is not informed who was the owner of the
offending truck and whether it was insured or not? It is also not informed
whether the truck driver was having driving license or not. RTO accidental
report on inspection of vehicles is not filed by the complainant. There is no
deficie
