JUDGMENT

 Sri A.K.Patra, President

1. The captioned Consumer Complaint is filed by the complainant named above inter alia alleging negligence & deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties for non release of crop insurance benefit under Pradhan Mantri Fasala Bima Yojana (PMFBY) on account of loss of paddy crop grown in Kharif 2021.
2. The complainant seeks for an order directing the Ops to exempt from payment of loan amount of Rs. 3,70,000/ & interest amount of Rs 50,000/- and for an award of Rs 15,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment with litigation cost.
3. The factual matrix leading to the case of the complainant as submitted by the complainant & emerged from the case record is that, the complainant is a farmer by occupation holding KCC (kisan credit card) with Op 2/ICICI Bank, Bhawanipatna. He had cultivated paddy crop over his agriculture land under Khata No.66 of village/Mouza : Jhikimiki , GP-Dadpur, P.S./Tahasil- Bhawanipatna  during Kharif 2021 taking agricultural loan of Rs 3,70,000/-from  the Op2/Bank and insured his crop with AIC/OP 1 under PMFBY paying insurance premium of Rs 9,240.45 on dt. 27.07.2021 which was debited by the OP2/Bank from his account vide A/C ID 077751OOO076 .The complainant present further submitted that, said paddy crops grown in  Kharif:- 2021 got damaged due to shortage of rain for which the Govt. of Odisha has declared draught in the Dadpur GP, Dist-Kalahandi, accordingly  co-villagers have already received their entitlement of crops insurance benefit under PMFBY but due to negligence & deficient services of the Ops the complainant has not yet received his  entitlement of crops insurance benefit for which he suffered financial  loss & mental agony. Hence, this complaint. 
4. To substantiate his claim the complainant has filed a self attested photo copy of A/C ID No. 077751000076 there with the ICICI Bank Ltd ,Bhawanipatna , copy of his Adhar Card Vide No. 4768 0511 6738 Letter No. 9413/Agri dt.27.10.22 of the Chief District Agriculture Officer, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna. Copy of ROR Vide Khata No 66 of Mouza: Jikimiki ,PS/Thasil - Bawanipatna ,Dist-Kalahandi(Odisha).
5. The averment of the complainant petition is supported by an affidavit of the complainant Narottam Gouda.
6.  On being notice, the Op 2(two) & 3(three) did not appear to filed their written version. However, they are allowed to participate in the further proceeding of this case but did not turn up.
7.  The OP 1(one) appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri P.K.Bhoi but failed to file their written version within the stipulated period of time as prescribed under C.P.Act,2019 for which written version filed by the OP 1(one)  in belated stage has not been accepted in view of order  dt.4.3.2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vrs. Hilli Multi Purpose Cold Storage .
8. The  OPS are allowed to participate in the further proceeding of this case without written version but none of the  Opp.Parties choose to participate in the hearing of this case .The contentions of the complainant remain unchallenged .
9. Heard complainant present. Perused the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the oral submission of the complainant.
10. The complainant draws our attention on the revised guideline of PMFBY and most specifically on the clause /Para 17 of revised PMFBY which casts a duty on the Bank that: -” the Bank are required to upload the details of insured farmers’ data mandatorily on the National Crop Insurance Portal. The concern branches of the Bank and Nodal Banks/DCCB in case of PACS will upload the details of the individual insured famer (Both Loanee & Non-Loanee) like farmers’ name, Fathers name ,Account Number, Aadhar Number ,Village ,Categories-Small & Marginal /SC,ST /Women insured area , details of insured land , insured crop(s) etc. as prescribed in online application on National Crop Insurance Portal and CBS integration mandate and submit the same within stipulated cut-off-date as per the seasonally discipline/The Banks /PACS must also ensure the premium amount is remitted to the concerned insurance company electronically within the stipulated time” .
11. The complainant further draws our attention to point No. 35.5.8 in Revamped Operational Guideline of PMFBY :-“Lead bank/Administrative officers of Banks should ensure that all farmers sanctioned crop loans/seasonal operational loan /KCC Loan for notified crop(s) are necessarily insured (except those opted out) and strict adherence of all conditions stated in the Operational Guideline of the Scheme .No eligible farmer should be deprived of an insurance cover .Lead banks/Administrative Officer of the Banks therefore, should make all efforts and pursue their branches for enrolling all eligible loanee farmers and interested non-loanee farmers under crop insurance. In case, claims have arisen during crop season then respective defaulting bank and its branch would be made responsible to make payment of admissible claims to loanee farmers who were deprived of insurance cover”
12. Here in this case the complainant has not opted out. It is not disputed that, insurance premium of Rs 9,240.45 is debited on dt. 27.07.2021 from the account of the complainant maintained with the OP2/Bank towards crops insurance payable to the AIC/OP No 1 (one). Nothing cogent evidence is placed on record to hold that said debited premium is successfully remitted to the AIC/OP No.1 within the time period as prescribed. Admittedly remittance of premium is beyond the control of the insured farmers/complainant.
13. On being asked the OP No.3/Chief District Agriculture Officer, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna vide his office letter No 11855/Agril. Dt.24/11/2013 submitted his  reported that, , during Kharif 2021-22 Dadpur G.P of Bhawanipatna Block was declared as 62% Shortfall Yield remains un-challenged /un-rebutted.
14. The complainant /farmer have suffered crop loss of 62 % grown over his agriculture land during Kharif 2021 is proved. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that, the complainant is entitled for crop insurance benefit @ 62% of sum assured of crops.
15. As per the revised guideline of PMFBY the framer share of premium payable is 2% of sum assured and it is not disputed that insurance premium of Rs.9,240.45 i.e @ 2% of sum assured has been debited from the farmers/complainant account maintained there with Op2/Bank as such the sum assured is calculate at  Rs.462022. Loss sustained @ 62 % of sum assured. Hence total loss sustained by the complainant /farmer is calculated at  Rs 286453.95/- rounded  up at Rs 2,86,454/- .Accordingly the complainant is entitled to get  release of Rs 2,86,454 along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filling of this complaint .
16. Based on the above facts & circumstances we  are of the opinion that, due to negligence, unfair trade practice & deficient service there on the part of Op 2/Bank the entitlement of crops insurance benefit is not yet released to the complainant as such there is sufficient cause continue to bring this complainant and it is filed on time well maintainable under C.P .Act 2019.
17. The PMFBY is a beneficial scheme of the government to protect the interest of the poor farmer.  Nothing cogent evidence placed on the record to hold that, the OP2/Bank has remitted the deducted insurance premium to the insurance Company .There is no any “force majeure event” assigned  which may excuse liability for  performance of the obligation of OP 2/Bank  rather , such an act of non remittance of deducted insurance premium of the farmer under PMFBY  to the AIC/OP1 resulting denial  of  crops insurance benefit to the complainant certainly frustrated the very purpose of PMFBY meant for the poor farmers of the nation is a great concern and such act of negligence & deficient service of the Op 2/bank certainly caused financial lose & mental agony to the complainant need to be compensated .
18. In the case of Canara Bank Vrs. Seth Prakash Jain&Anr. I (2014)CPJ 76(NC) the Hon’ble NCDRC held that, in case of a bankers mistake the bank is responsible for the same .Consequently, the bank is liable to compensate the complainant .  
19. There is nothing pleaded or proved that, the complainant/insured farmer has misrepresented any fact or have played fraud to obtained crop insurance under PMFBY for loss of his paddy crop grown during Kharif 2021 and there is nothing fault  proved against the complainant, as such we are of the opinion that, when the genuine claim of the complainant is not yet settled, the complainant is entitled to heavy compensation with punitive damages, so that, in future the Bank would not dare to sitting over the claim of any insured farmer under PMFBY for uncertain period of time without assigning reason there for or   on such a ground that is beyond the control of the insured farmers  .Accordingly we are of our opinion that, the OP 2/Bank is liable pay punitive damages to the complainant by way of restraining themselves from demanding repayment of agriculture loan advanced to the complainant during Kharif 2021. Reliance may also be placed on the judgment recently passed on dt. 08.07.2022 by the Hon’ble State Commission, Odisha, Cuttack in C.C No. 19 of 2018, Ranjan Mahapatra Vs. Star Health & Allied Insurance Co.Ltd reported in 2020(II) OLR (CSR) Page 326.
20. Based on the above facts & circumstances and as per revised guideline & settled principle of law we are of the opinion that, debiting   premium from the farmer/complainant account and non remittance of the same to the insurance company sitting over the claim of complainant for an uncertain period of time at the peril is  nothing but an unfair trade practice & deficient service on the part of OP2/Bank for which the bank is liable to compensate the complainant by way of releasing the insurance benefit of Rs  2,86,454/- with interest @9% P.A from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 04/03/2023  till its realization to the complainant and further the OP 2/Bank is liable pay punitive damages to the complainant by way of restraining themselves from demanding repayment of the agriculture loan advanced to the complainant during Kharif 2021 and further liable to par  litigation cost of Rs 5,000 to the complainant . Nothing deficient service or unfair trade practice is found there against the other Ops .Hence it is ordered.

O R D E R

                                                                                      This consumer complaint is allowed in part exparte against the OP 2/ICICI Bank, Bhawanipatna & dismissed against the other Opp.Parties with the following direction:-

(i) The OP2/ICICI Bank ,Bhawanipatna is here by directed to pay compensation Rs  2,86,454/- towards loss of crops insurance benefit under Pradhan Mantri Fasala Bima Yojana (PMFBY) with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filling of this complaint i.e. from dt.04.03.2023 till its realization. (ii)The OP 2/Bank is further directed to pay  punitive damages to the complainant by way of restraining themselves from demanding repayment of the agriculture loan advanced to the complainant during Kharif 2021 vide A/C ID 077751000076  and to issue “No Due Certificate””.(iii)  The  OP 2/Bank is further directed to pay  litigation cost of Rs 5,000 to the complainant .(iv) It is further directed to comply the aforesaid order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order falling which the  Op 2/bank shall be liable to pay Rs.500/-(five) per day as compensation to the complainant till compliance of this order..

Dictated & corrected by me.

I agree.

   Pronounced in open forum today on this 10^th April 2024 under the seal and signature of this Commission .The pending application if any is also stands disposed off accordingly.

   Free copy of this order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download the same from the Confonet to treat the same as copy of the order receipt from this Commission. Order accordingly.