BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 204 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 21.09.2020.
Date of Decision : 02.11.2023.
Bharat Bhushan aged about 34 years son of Sh. Vijay Kumar, resident of 15/96, Gali Haryana Guest House Wali, Court Colony, Sirsa, Haryana.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Agriculture Insurance Company, Plate B & C, 5th Floor, Office Block 1, East Kidwai Nagar, Opp. AIIMS Gate 2, New Delhi- 110023.
2. Punjab National Bank through its Manager, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………….MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Parveen Godara, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that he is having 34 kanals 04 marlas being 1/2 share of land (as detailed in para no.2 of the complaint) in the revenue estate of village Talwara Khurd, District Sirsa as per jamabandi for the year 2017-2018. He is having Kisan Credit Card with op no.2 bearing account number 4155008800003497. That complainant got insured his paddy crop of kharif, 2019 with op no.1 through op no.2 and premium of Rs.3037.89 was deducted from his account by op no.2 and same was deposited with op no.1. It is further averred that paddy crop of complainant of kharif, 2019 was damaged and loss report was prepared by op no.1 alongwith department of Agriculture, Haryana and as per loss report, insurance claim of Rs.12,000/- per acre was given to the farmers of village Talwara Khurd, District Sirsa but the complainant has not received any insurance claim amount. It is further averred that complainant approached the ops several times and requested to pay compensation but none of the ops paid any claim amount to him and as such it is clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of ops. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that as per NCI portal coverage, the paddy crop of complainant in the village Talwara Khurd was not insured with answering op during above mentioned season and cotton crop of complainant was insured with op no.1 by op no.2 bank. As there was no shortfall in the actual crop yield of cotton crop of complainant in the insured village Talwara Khurd during kharif, 2019 season, therefore, no area approach claims became payable. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 also filed written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that on the asking of complainant, the answering op has got insured the declared crops i.e. cotton crop of complainant with op no.1 by paying premium amount of Rs.3037.89 to op no.1 after deducting the same from the account of complainant. It is further submitted that it is wrong that complainant has got his paddy crop insured and that answering op has ever told the complainant that his paddy crop has been got insured with op no.1. At the time of insurance of cotton crop of complainant, the complainant was very much present and he himself has declared that cotton crop has been sown by him in his field. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. The parties then led their respective evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
7. Though complainant is claiming insurance claim amount for the damage of his paddy crop of kharif, 2019 but however, the complainant himself at the time of availing loan facility from op no.2 bank through application Ex.R16 declared that he will sow cotton crop in kharif season in his 4.9 acres of land and said application is duly signed by complainant himself. The complainant has not placed on file any document/ letter to prove the fact that complainant has intimated the op no.2 bank regarding change of pattern of crop i.e. from cotton to paddy in kharif season. Since the complainant has not given any intimation to the op no.2 bank regarding change of crop pattern, therefore, op no.2 bank got insured cotton crop of complainant and as such complainant is not entitled to any claim amount for the damage of his paddy crop from any of the ops and as such complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by his own act and conduct.
8. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member President
Dt. 02.11.2023. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
