BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 209 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 21.09.2020.
Date of Decision : 24.10.2024.
Ved Pal son of Shri Rishal Singh, resident of village Rupawas, Tehsil Nathusari Chopta, District 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. State Bank of India through its Manager, Village Shah Pur Begu, District Sirsa, Haryana.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Sushil Saharan, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.1.
Sh. Vinay Gandhi, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER:-
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (herein after referred as OPs).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that he is an agriculturist and is cultivating agricultural land measuring around 68 kanals situated in the revenue estate of village Rupawas, District Sirsa. He is having Kisan Credit Card account with op no.2 bearing account number 33684946465. It is further averred that as per crop insurance scheme, the op no.2 got insured his crop of cotton of complainant of the season of Kharif, 2019 in his six acres of land with op no.1 and op no.2 deducted premium amount of Rs.3534/- from the account of complainant and deposited the same with op no.1. That said cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2019 season was damaged and other farmers of village Rupawas have received insurance claim of about Rs.12,000/- per acre but complainant has not received any insurance claim from any of ops and as such ops have caused deficiency in service and unnecessary harassment to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written version submitting therein that claims are payable as per the provisions of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna (PMFBY) and State Govt. notification. On the basis of name, father’s name and village name of the farmer and branch named State Bank of India Branch Shahpur Begu, Sirsa (Op no.2) mentioned in the complaint, it has been found that complainant is a loanee farmer whose notified crops were insured by the above said bank branch by uploading his coverage details in the NCI portal of Govt. of India as under:-
Sh. Ved Pal s/o Rispal Singh (Farmer ID 90028751) Application ID no. 040106191010351077701 uploaded by State Bank of India, Branch Shahpur Begu, Sirsa for coverage of cotton crop in land survey no. 671 and land sub division no. 671 of village Sherpura (54), Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa (Kharif 2019).
4 It is further submitted that on the basis of coverage details mentioned in the complaint, it has been found that complainant is a loanee farmer whose notified crops were insured by the Sirsa Central Coop. Bank Ltd. Branch Rupawas by uploading his coverage details in the NCI portal of Govt. of India as under:-
Sh. Ved Pal s/o Rispal Singh (Farmer ID 90028751) Application ID no. 040106191011963381101 uploaded by Sirsa Central Coop. Bank Ltd. Branch Rupawas, Sirsa for coverage of cotton crop in land survey no. 247 and land sub division no. 165 of village Rupawas (26), Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa (Kharif 2019).
5. It is further submitted that accordingly answering op has considered the coverage details of the complainant farmer as uploaded by the op bank in the NCI portal. As per NCI portal coverage, the cotton crop of complainant Wrt Application id no. 040106191010351077701 in village Rupawas, Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa was not insured with the answering op during the above mentioned season. Therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any claim for the crops in village Rupawas, Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa from the op no.1 under PMFBY during Kharif 2019 season whereas cotton crop of complainant in village Sherpura, Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa is insured on the NCI portal. It is further submitted that Wrt Application ID no. 040106191011963381101 as there was shortfall in the actual yield for insured cotton crop of village Rupawas, Block Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa during Kharif 2019 season, therefore, area approach claim during season Kharif, 2019 is already paid to the complainant farmer on 22.05.2020 with area approach claim of Rs.11,893.74 as per PMFBY scheme provisions. It is further submitted that Wrt ID no. 040106191010351077701 as there was no shortfall recorded in the actual yield of the insured cotton crop of complainant in village Sherpura (54) Block Nathusari Chopta during the Kharif 2019 season, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any area approach claim based upon yield data derived through crop cutting experiments under GCES and as such op no.2 bank is liable for this mistake regarding uploading village name of land of complainant as Sherpura instead of Rupawas as per operational guidelines of PMFBY. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
6. Op no.2 also filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that op no.2 got insured the crop standing in the fields of complainant insured after deduction of the amount of premium from the account of complainant which was paid to op no.1 on behalf of complainant. The compensation amount on account of damages to the crops in the fields of complainant is to be paid by the insurance company. The contract of insurance is in between the complainant and op no.1 and bank is not a party to the contract, in any manner. There is no fault or negligence on behalf of op bank in sending the particulars/ data sent by the bank to the op no.1. It is further submitted that no claim has been sent by op no.1 to op no.2 relating to insurance of the crops in the fields of complainant and no amount of premium has been returned to op bank on behalf of complainant. In this way, there is no liability of op bank regarding insurance claim. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
7. The parties then led their respective evidence.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
9. The complainant is claiming insurance claim for the loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2019 in his land situated in village Rupawas. From the jamabandi for the year 2017-2018 Ex.P3, it is also evident that complainant is having his agricultural land in village Rupawas, District Sirsa. Learned counsel for complainant during the course of arguments has placed on file letter/ report of Deputy Director Agriculture department, Sirsa in which it is reported that average yield of cotton crop of Kharif, 2019 was 352.78 Kgs. per hectare and threshold yield of block Nathusari Chopta was 572.40 Kgs. per hectare. So, as per this report there was also loss to the cotton crop of complainant in Kharif, 2019 as per operational guidelines of PMFBY. It is also proved on record from document Ex.R2/1 i.e. entrance and confirmation of mutation placed on file by op no.2 bank itself that complainant mortgaged his agricultural land measuring 45 kanals 13 marlas as detailed in the said document situated in village Rupawas, Tehsil and District Sirsa with op no.2 bank. However, op no.2 bank while uploading the data of complainant on the portal while insuring the cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2019 shown the land of complainant in village Sherpura (54) instead of village Rupawas as is evident from document Ex.R1/10 placed on file by op no.1 insurance company. So, there is mistake on the part of op no.2 bank while uploading the data of complainant on the portal. The sum insured amount of cotton crop in year 2019 was Rs.76,600/- per hectare as is evident from Haryana Govt. notification dated 24.05.2019 Ex. R1/8. So as per formula given in the operational guidelines of PMFBY, the complainant is entitled to insurance claim amount of Rs. 67,900/- for the loss of his cotton crop in his 2.31 hectare of land for which premium amount was deducted by op no.2 bank. The op no.2 bank is liable to pay the said claim amount of Rs.67,900/- to the complainant because Clause 17.2 of the operational guidelines of PMFBY stipulates that 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 (if any).
10. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint against op no.2 bank and direct the op no.2 bank to pay the claim amount of Rs.67,900/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be entitled to receive the said amount of Rs.67,900/- from op no.2 bank alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment. We also direct the op no.2 bank to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. However, complaint qua op no.1 stands dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced. Member Member President,
Dated: 24.10.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
