Date of filing:- 27/07/2018.

                                                                                                        Date of Order/Judgement:-02/05/2023.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No.  53  of 2018.

Sanjay Sahu, Ro. Village Sarandapali, Po.Sarandapali, Via. Bijepur, Ps. Bijepur, Dist. Bargarh. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Complainant.

V e r s u s

1. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Barpali Branch, At/Po/Ps. Barpali, Dist. Bargarh (Odisha) Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Sambalpur through its Divisional Manager, At. VSS Marg, Sambalpur, Ps/Dist. Sambalpur.  
2. The Legal Manager ICICI, Lombard G.I.C. 3rd floor, Plot No. 29, Anju Building, Satya Nagar, Bhubaneswar.

                                                                                                    Opposite Parties.                         

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainants: -                 :- Sri B.K. Panda, Advocate with Associates.

For the Opposite Party No.1:-       :- Sri R. Panda, Advocate with Associates.

For the Opposite Party No.2:-        :- Sri Ashok Kumar Dash, Advocate.

                                                -: 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.02/05/2023.                                 -: J   U  D   G  E  M  E  N  T:-

Presented by Smt. Anju Agrawal,  Member (w):-

1. The Case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a non loanee farmer and has paid an amount of  Rs. 3,409/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred nine)only to the Opposite Party No.1/Bank in the account of  the Complainant towards premium for crop insurance for the Kharif 2016-17 season crop on Dt. 02/08/2016. The said premium received was remitted to Opposite Party No.2/ICICI  Lombard on dt. 11/08/2016 and which was received on Dt. 17/08/2016 by Srikanta Prusti, ICICI Lombard, Bargarh Branch. The amount was paid through his account No. 3086106257 maintained with the Opposite Party No.1. That for financial security taking benefits under PMFBY (PMFBY) the Opposite Party No.2 is the insurance Company who has undertaken the Job of agricultureal insurance in the district of Bargarh and as per the Scheme the Nodal Bank has to collect the premium and remit it to the insurance company. That, the Complainant has availed crop loan for a area of Ac 2.5 hector and paid amount of  Rs. 3,409/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred nine)only to the Opposite Party No.1 for Adverse weather conditions the govt. declared 68% crop damage in i.e. the area of the cultivation for kharif 2016-2017 in respect of paddy crops.

In the last part of September 2017, the Complainant learnt that fellow farmers govt. the compensation, approached the Opposite party No.1 but the Opposite Party No.1 never reimbursed the same. The Opposite Parties failed to disburse the crop insurance inspite of several request. Being harassed, the Complainant sought redressal before this Commission.

2. The Opposite party No.1, SBI, Barpali Branch in its version submitted that the Opposite Party No.1 in PMFBY as Nodal Bank is performing the role of post office Business only as per the govt. Order. That, on oral approach of the Complainant his premium money along with that of Six non loanee farmers were remitted by Opposite Party No.1 to Opposite Party No.2 vide Demand draft bearing No. 490879 and was send to Opposite Party No.2 through letter No. Adv/32/2016-17 Dt. 11/08/2016 and it was duly received and encashed by Opposite Party No.2, the Complainant also documented his approach in proper format with documents through online on Dt. 30/11/2016. When the Complainant came to Opposite party No.1 regarding his insurance money, the Opposite Party No.1 enquired it through mail to Opposite party No.2 but the Opposite Party No.2 remained silent. That during, February 2018, the Opposite Party No.2, enquired about it through mail id on Dt. 08/02/2018 and Opposite Party No.2 disclosed that the premium money of the  non loanee farmers including the Complainant have been refunded due to non availability of farmers details within stipulated cut off date. The Opposite party No.1 has done his duty, and as the Complainant is a non loanee farmer the Opposite Party No.1 has no knowledge regarding the declared crop damage. There is no deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party No.1. Hence the case is liable to be dismissed.
3.  The Opposite Party No.2/ICICI Lombard G.I.C. Ltd in its version submitted that the Complainant had paid premium for non loanee crop insurance through Opposite Party No.1 which he received on behalf of Opposite party No.2 on 11/08/2016 which was received on Dt. 17/08/2016 by one  Srikant prusti of ICICI Lombard Bargarh Branch and fthe amount was paid through his Account No. 11280426253 is denied as no such Branch of this Opposite Party is existent at  Bargarh. That the Opposite Party No.2 has never received any premium either from the Complainant on from the Opposite Party No.1 to insure the crop of the Complainant. That, the Complainant has paid amount of Rs. 5,454/-(Rupees five thousand four hundred fifty four)only as not known. Evidence of Opposite Party No.2 filed in the form of affidavit wherein it stated that no farmers details were sent  to Opposite Party No.2, So Opposite party No.2 is not liable to extend any coverage to the loss of the Complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.2. The case is likely to be dismissed.
4. The Complainant filed.

1. Submission PMFBY Non loanee farmer details.
2. Application details.
3. Certificate by Assistant Agricultural Officer.
4. Xerox copy  of saving Bank.
5. Xerox copy of voter ID Card.
6. Letter to  Director of Cooperative Society, Odisha.

The Opposite Party No.1/Bank filed the following documents.

1. Copy of letter No. ADV/No.32/2016-17 is Dt. 11/08/2016.
2. Copy of letter bearing No. RMSL 39/61 Dt. 18/10/17.
3. Copy of letter bearing No. ZO/SAM/RBO VICR and NPA/42 Dt. 02/11/2017.
4. Downloaded copy of mail Dt. 08/02/2018.
5. Copy of letter bearing no. 2017-18/17.
6. Reply through mail Dt. 06/03/2018.
7. Downloaded copy of mail Dt. 06/03/2018.
8. Copy of letter bearing no. ABU/SNC/33 Dt. 19/04/2018.
9. Copy of letter bearing No. 29/08 Dt. 21/04/2018.
10. Copy of letter bearing No. 546/coop Dt. 27/04/2018.

The Opposite Party No.2/Insurance  Company filed evidence in the form of affidavit.

5. After perusal of the Complaint petition, version of the parties and documents filed by the parties following issues are framed.

ISSUES

1. Is the Complainant not a Consumer of the Opposite Parties ?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the claim for deficiency in service ?
3. What relief the Complainant is entitled for ?

Issue No.1

            The Complainant is having a  Account bearing No. 3086106257 with the Opposite Party No.1, SBI, Barpali Branch and has deposited Rs. 3,409/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred nine)only for land Ac 2.5 hectre on dt. 02/08/2016 for PMFBY Kharif 2016-17 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 he is using the bank account to deposit his premium and Consumer of  Opposite Party No.2 as his crop is insured by paying Rs. 3,409/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred nine)only premium.

            Issue is answered accordingly.

Issue No.2

On Dt. 02/08/2016 the Complainant deposited Rs. 3,409/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred nine)only towards insurance premium under PMFBY scheme. After depositing the Said Premium the Opposite Party No.1/Bank submitted the premium and details of the Complainant along with other non laonee farmers on Dt. 11/08/2016 to Opposite Party No.2 which was duly received by person namely Srikanta presently of Opposite party No.2, Bargarh Branch. The Complainant has deposited premium for 2.50 henctre of land. During declaration of crop damage the Complainant went to the Opposite Party No.1/Bank to disburse his premium, the Opposite Party No.1  after verbal request issue in writing to the Opposite party No.2 to disburse the insurance Compensation.

            The Opposite party No.2 denied on the ground that due to non uploading of farmers data within stipulated cut off date the Complainants crop was not insured. The Opposite Party No.2 has received the premium from Opposite Party No.1, while receiving the provision it is the duly of Opposite Party No.2 to verify the same. Holding the premium amount for about more than one years and depositing the premium for in the account of Opposite Party No.1 amounts to deficiency in service  on the part of Opposite Party No.2.

            If the relevant documents were not there it is the duly of the Opposite Party No.2 to communicate the same to the Opposite Party No.1 but the Opposite Party No.2 remained silent.

            The Opposite Party No.2 denied on the ground that the there is no such person named Srikanta Prusti of ICICI Lombard Bargarh Branch and there is no such Branch is  Bargarh, If this is the case it is the duty of the Opposite Party to take action regarding this matter but there is no such documents in supports of this plea.

            During the year 2017, the declared crop damage for Katapali, G.P. is 68%. The Complainant has not filed the sum insured, but as per the insurance premium and PMFBY guidelines the sum insured of the crops  is Rs. 1,70,450/-(Rupees one lakh seventy thousand    four hundred fifty)only and for 68% damage, the Complaint is entitled to received Rs.1,15,906/-(Rupees one lakh  fifteen thousand nine hundred six)only.

            Due to non settlement of claim the Complainant is harassed and could not get 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 has done its duty by depositing  the premium amount to the Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 after receiving the premium amount remained silent and after about  more than a year after that, the Opposite party No.2 deposited the premium amount to Opposite Party No.1. Hence, for the negligence of Opposite Party No.2 Opposite Party No.1 cannot be liable. Accordingly it is Ordered.      

O R D E R

The Complaint is allowed on contest along Opposite Party No.2 ICICI Lombard GIC and dismissed against Opposite Party No.1. The Opposite Party No.2 is directed to pay the Insurance claim of Rs.1,15,906/-(Rupees one lakh  fifteen thousand nine hundred six)only along with intrest @ 7% w.e.f. 08/02/2018 within one month of this order. In case of non payment the entire order will carry 12% per annum till realization.

Further the Opposite Party No.2 is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)only towards harassement and Rs. 5000/-(Rupees five thousand)only towards litigation expenses Order pronounced in open court on  02^th day of  May 2023.

            Supply free copies to the parties. 

      Typed to my dictation

                                                                                          and corrected by me.                                                                                           

                 I  agree/-                                                                       

      ( Smt. Jigeesha Mishra)                                                               (Anju Agarwal)

              Dt.02/05/2023                                                                         Dt.02/05/2023.

              P r e s i d e n t.                                                                       M e m b e r  (w).