IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
C.W.P NO. 2252 OF 2009
DECIDED ON : 12.02.2009
National Insurance Co. Ltd.
...Petitioner
versus
Presiding Officer, PLA and others
...Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
Present : Mr. N. S. Jagdeva, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
This writ petition has been filed by the National
Insurance Company Limited against the award dated 06.11.2008
passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services),
Ferozepur, whereby a sum of Rs.20,000/- (with Rs.1000/- as
costs) has been awarded to respondent No.2-a farmer on account
of the unnatural death of his buffalo, which was admittedly
insured with the petitioner-company.
The instant petition exposes the sorry state of affairs
as to how the Statutory Corporation or Government Company
like the petitioner also indulge in frivolous and avoidable
litigation, thereby burdening the Court dockets.
C.W.P NO. 2252 OF 2009 -2-
It is an admitted fact that respondent No.2-claimant-a
farmer got his buffalo insured for the value of Rs.20,000/- on
28.11.2006 with the petitioner-company. The insurance took
place through the office of Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry at
Ferozepur and the Senior Veterinary Officer, Civil Veterinary
Hospital, Zira, District Ferozepur. Unfortunately, the buffalo died
on 12.03.2007 due to fever and its post mortem was also
conducted on the same day by the Veterinary Surgeon of the
Veterinary Hospital, village Bhagoke. Respondent No.2-the
farmer submitted his claim form through the Civil Veterinary
Hospital of the village on 16.03.2007 which was duly forwarded
to the petitioner-company. The claimant did not hear anything for
a sufficiently long period of time, despite a legal notice having
been served on his behalf. Thereafter, he filed a claim petition
before the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) at
Ferozepur.
Two objections were taken by the petitioner-company
on merits. Firstly, it was alleged that the claim petition was
forwarded by the Civil Veterinary Hosptial Authorities after eight
months and that the “year tag” of the buffalo did not accompany
the claim application.
The impugned award reveals that the Permanent Lok
Adalat adjourned the case for 01.10.2008, 16.10.2008,
24.10.2008 and 06.11.2008 respectively for conciliation, but no
responsible officer put in an appearance on behalf of the
C.W.P NO. 2252 OF 2009 -3-
petitioner-company. It was thereafter only that the Permanent
Lok Adalat proceeded to decide the claim on merits.
The Permanent Lok Adalat has found, as a matter of
fact, that the buffalo was insured; the buffalo died on account of
fever; the claim form was submitted by the claimant within three
days of the death i.e on 16.03.2007; the only procedural
defeciency in the claim form was lack of verification by the Senior
Veterinary Officer, Civil Veterinary Hospital, Zira and that it was
not submitted in duplicate, for which the claimant was again
called on 07.11.2007 when he submitted the application in
duplicate. Yet the payment was not released. In these
circumstances, the Permanent Lok Adalat proceeded to decide
the case on merits and has passed the impugned award.
Being conscious of the fact that this Court in exercise
of its writ jurisdiction will not travel into the factual conclusions,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the
judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “United India
Insurance Company Limited vs. Manubhai Dharamsinhbhai
Gajera” 2008 (10) Supreme Court Cases 404, the
Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), had no jurisdiction
to entertain the claim petition and as such, the impugned award
is without jurisdiction.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at
some length, I am of the considered view that there is no merit in
this writ petition. The Permanent Lok Adalat meant and has done
C.W.P NO. 2252 OF 2009 -4-
substantial justice to a poor farmer and the Award warrants no
interference by this Court for more than one reason. Firstly, no
plea regarding lack of jurisdiction was taken before the Lok
Adalat at the time of arguments. Having taken a chance before
the Permanent Lok Adalat, it is too late to urge that the said Fora
had no authority to decide the lis.
Secondly, there is no legal necessity to relegate the
parties to an alternative Forum as no serious issue is found
involved in this case. It would not only defeat the cause of
justice, but would encourage the cantecourous and mighty
litigants like the petitioner-company to prolong the agony of a
light weight opponent. Thirdly, the facts that the buffalo was
insured, it died an unnatural death and the claim had not become
time barred, being not in dispute, a writ Court requires no other
material to direct on its own for the release of due payment to
the respondent-farmer. Besides this, the conduct of the
petitioner-company who had shown scant respect to the
institution of Permanent Lok Adalat, is yet another circumstance
to dissuade this Court from interfering into the impugned award.
For the reasons mentioned above, I find no merit in
this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.
FEBRUARY 12, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE