Date of filing:- 01/02/2021.
Date of Order/Judgement:-25/04/2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Complaint No. 15 of 2021.
Jayanta Kumar Rath, S/o. Subash Rath, aged about 45 years, R/o.village. Kesaipali, Ps. Bhatli, Dist. Bargarh (Odisha).
Complainant.
V e r s u s
- Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ambabhona Branch, At/Po/Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh (Odisha).
- Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Sambalpur through its Divisional Manager, At. VSS Marg, Sambalpur, Ps/Dist. Sambalpur.
Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainants :- :- Sri Mansi Sahu, Advocate with Associates.
For the Opposite Party No.1:- :- Sri Bira Kishor Mahapatra, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party No.2:- :- Sri P.K. Mahapatra, Advocate with Associates.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Smt. Jigeesha Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Smt. Anju Agarwal ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.25/04/2023. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Smt. Anju Agrawal, Member (w):-
- The Case of the Complainant is that the Complainant obtained crop loan from the Opposite Party No.1/ Bank and operating his loan transactions with the Opposite Party No.1/Bank through his passbook Account No. 38632612551.The Complainant has obtained crop loan for Ac 3.96 dec (1.58 Hactre) of land for kharif 2019. That for financial security the govt. of India had implemented Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) for paddy crops interalia other crops and as per the said PMFBY guidelines every farmers who have availed crop loans are required to be compulsorily covered under the scheme. As such, the Complainant had deposited the premium amount of Rs.1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only on Dt. 31/07/2019 through his account in the Branch of OP No.1. The Opposite Party No.1 is supposed to have remitted the premium amount to the Opposite Party No.2 for coverage of crop insurance of the Complainant under the PMFBY Scheme.
Due to adverse weather condition the govt. declared 47.79% crop damage in sukuda gram panchayat under Bhatli Block. The sum assured of crop insurance amount per hectare was Rs.65000/-(Rupees sixty five thousand)only for Kharif 2019 and the Complainant is entitled to get the Compensation of Rs. 49204/-(Rupees forty nine thousand two hundred four)only for Ac 3.96 dec (1.58 hectare) towards the damage and loss he had sustained for kharif 2019. That, the Complainant learned from his fellow farmers in the last part of August 2020, that the Opposite party No.2 is disbursing the Compensation amount to the farmers who have insured their crops through OP No.1. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party No.1/Bank but the Opposite Party deffered the same on different pretext and ultimately refused to make payment. Being harassed, the Complainant sought redressal before this Commission.
- The Case of the Opposite Party No.1, SBI, Ambabhona Branch in its version submitted that the Complainant had availed a crop loan from the Opposite party No.1 and operating his loan transactions with the Opposite party No.1 through his passbook Account No. 38632612551. The Complainant is a loanee farmer and as per PMFBY guidelines every farmers who have availed agricultural loan are required to be compulsorily covered under the crop insurance scheme. That, the Complainant has insured his crop over Ac. 3.96 dec (1.58 hectare ) of land and has deposited the premium amount of Rs. 1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only on Dt. 31/07/2019. That, the sum assured amount of crop insurance amount per hectare was Rs.65000/-(Rupees sixty five thousand)only for kharif 2019 and as per govt. declaration of 47.79% percentage of crop damage in Sukuda gram panchayat under Bhatli Block, the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.49202/-(Rupees forty nine thousand two hundred two)only and the Opposite Party No.2 is liable to pay the name through Opposite Party No.1 is admitted. The Opposite Party No.1 further submitted that Opposite Party No.1 has no knowledge that the Complainant is deprived of getting compensation till the date of filling of this case. When the Opposite Party No.1 verified the account and premium it was detected that the name of mouza is mentioned and Kesaipali instead of Sukuda. The Opposite Party No.1 made written correspondence on Dt. 23/03/2021 the higher authorities of Opposite Party No.2 to credit the compensation amount in the loan account of Complainant. The Opposite Party No.1 has filed citation and memo of argument in support of his case. Hence the Opposite Party No.1 have not committed any wrong or deficiency intentionally and Opposite Party No.1 deserved to be absolved from all the liabilities.
- The case of the Opposite Party No.2 Oriental Insurance Co.ltd in its version submitted that the Complainant cannot be termed as a Consumer. The Opposite party No.1 is operating his loan transactions with the Complainant. The farmers availing agricultural loan from Bank are compulsorily covered and it is the duty of the Opposite Parties to insure is not true. The Banks are authorized to upload the insured farmers data mandatorily on the National crop Insurance portal (NCIP) and no other platform shall be used for uploading of their details on portal. The Opposite Party No.2 cannot modify the data uploaded. Since, the Complainant has been insured under Kesaiplai GP of Bhatli Block by the concerned Bank instead of Sukuda GP, the Complainant is not entitled to receive any Compensation for less from Opposite party No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 is not deficient in its service, nor committed any unfair trade practive. Accordingly, the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
- Perused the documents filed by parties and following issues are framed:-
ISSUES
- Whether the Complainant is the consumer of the Opposite Parties ?
- Whether the Opposite Parties are deficient in their service?
- What relief the Complainant is entitled to get.
Issue No.1
The Complainant is having a Passbook Account No. 38632612551 with the Opposite Party No.1/ SBI, Ambabhona Branch and availed crop loan during kharif 2019 for Ac.3.96 dec (1.58 Hectre) in respect of paddy crops interalia either crops in Sukuda GP under Bhatli Block. The Complainant on Dt. 31/07/2019 deposited of Rs.1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only in the Branch of Opposite Party No.1 towards PMFBY kharif 2019 Insurance Premium. The Opposite Party No.1/Bank is an intermediary to the insurance contract between the Complainant and the Opposite Party No.2. Accordingly, the Complainant is a Consumer of the Opposite Party No.1 as a loanee farmer and Consumer of Opposite Party No.2 as his crop is insured by paying Rs.1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only premium towards PMFBY.
Issue is answered accordingly.
Issue No.2
During kharif 2019, the Complainant had paid the premium of Rs. 1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only and he is entitled for the insurance coverage and insurance subsidy. In the Insurance proposal the Opposite Party No.1 uploaded the name of crop village mouza as Kesaipali instead of Sukuda Area insured 1.58 Hectre, sum assured per hectre Rs.65000/-(Rupees sixty five thousand)only. During the year 2019, it was declared by the govt. Crop loss of 47.79%. In Sukuda Gram Panchayat under Bhatli Block.
In the collection of proposals and premium from farmers guidelines it is a special condition that Those farmers whose data is uploaded on the National crop Insurance portal shall only be eligible for Insurance coverage and accordingly the premium subsidy will also be released. In cases where farmers are denied crop insurance due to incorrect/partial/non uploading of their details on portal, concerned Banks/intermediaries shall be responsible for payment of claims to them.
In the present Complaint as the Complainant paid the premium of Rs.1980/-(Rupees one thousand nine hundred eighty)only he is entitled for the insurance coverage and insurance subsidy.
The insurance coverage is Rs.65,000/-(Rupees sixty five thousand)only as per statement of the Opposite party No.1. The declared crop damage for Sukuda GP is 47.79% it means the insurance subsidy comes to Rs. 49,202/-(Rupees forty nine thousand two hundred two)only. Due to no settlement of claim the Complainant is harassed and could not get the benefits in time like other farmers of the locality.
The Issue is answered in favour of the Complainant.
Issue No.3.
As discussed Supra the Complainant is entitled for the relief claimed. The Opposite Party No.1 is deficient in its service by not providing correct data in the N.C.I.P. as a result the Opposite Party No.2 did not settle the claim. The loan is granted by the Opposite Party No.1. The land documents was with Opposite party No.1 whereas while uploading the documents mentioned it as Kesaipali mouza instead of Sukuda mouza. In the PMFBY guideline the role of Opposite Party No.2 is very specific. For the negligence of the Opposite Party No.1 the Opposite Party No.2 cannot be liable.
Accordingly it is Ordered.
O R D E R
The Complaint is allowed on contest against Opposite Party No.1 and dismissed against Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay the insurance claim amount of Rs. 49,202/-(Rupees forty nine thousand two hundred two)only, further the Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only compensation towards harassement and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand)only towards litigation expenses along with 7% intrest P.A. w.e.f. 31/07/2019 within one month of this order to the Complainant. In case of non payment the entire amount will carry 12% PA till realization.
Order pronounced in open court on 25th day of April 2023.
Supply free copies to the parties.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
I agree/-
( Smt. Jigeesha Mishra) (Anju Agarwal)
Dt.25/04/2023 Dt.25/04/2023.
P r e s i d e n t. M e m b e r (w)
