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