Kshetra Harijan, aged about 70 years,

 S/O- Late Rashika Harijan, At: Gokhara,PO; Saria,P.S. Narla,

 Dist-Kalahandi,Odisha.  

                                                                 …….…Complainant                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Vrs.

1. Union of India, represented through the Commissioner-cum-Under Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Co-operation farmer’s Welfare (DAC & FW), Ministry of agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. Commissioner-cum,-Secretary. Department of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Govt. of Odisha, Bhubaneswar.
3. Chief District Agriculture Officer, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna, Odisha.
4. State Bank of India, Rupra Road Branch, Represented through its authorized Officer,  At/Po- Rupra, P.S. Narla, Dist. Kalahandi, Odisha.
5. Agriculture Insurance Company, Office Block-1,5^th Floor, Flat B & C,

    East Kidwai Nagar, Ring Road, New Delhi,110023. ,

                                                                                                         ……..Opps Parties

For the Complainant:  Self .

       For the O.P 1:  Not appeared

       For the O.P 2 & 3: Self

       For the O.P 4: Shri G.K.Mohanty,Advocate

       For the O.P 5:  Shri P.K.Bhoi,Advocate

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 release the   crops insurance benefit under PMFBY for the loss @ 56% of sum assured of Rs. 40,671.01 of paddy crop grown in Kharif 2021 and further pray for an award of compensation towards mental agony and harassment along with litigation cost.
3.  The factual matrix leading to the case of the complainant as emerged from the case record is that, the complainant is a farmer by occupation. He had cultivated paddy crop over his agriculture land vide  Plot No.769 ,measuring an area of Ac.1.500 dcl. under Khata No.20 of village/Mouza-  Gokhara, G.P-Rakshi, P.S./Tahasil- Narla,Dist-Kalahandi  during Kharif 2021 and insured his crop with AIC/OP 5 under PMFBY for a sum assured of Rs.40,671.01 paying insurance premium of Rs.813.42 to the insurance company/AIC through CSC, Saria of SBI, Rupra Road vide Code No.247232240015 which was debited from his SB A/c No.34653270653 of SBI, Rupra Road vide Money Receipt  No.0401212100112481362 dt. 31.07.2021. It is contended that, the complainant has submitted required documents and have collected the above said money receipt as a token of successful payment of insurance premium to the insurer company /AIC. It is further submitted that, due to low rain fall,  the crop grown in Kharif 2021 got damaged  for which  Government of Odisha has declared  56% loss of paddy crop  during Kharif year 2021 in the locality of the complainant, however no claim is settled by the insurance company i.e.  Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd./OP 5 even after several approaches to the concern authorities though co-farmers have already received their insurance benefits. Hence, this complaint.
4. To substantiate his claim the complainant has filed the copy of money receipt vide No.0401212100112481362 dt.31.07.2021 vide Annexure 1. Copy of Aadhar Card of the complainant vide Annexure-2, Copy of SB Account No. 34653270653 vide Annexure-3, Copy of ROR vide Khata No.20 of village/Mouza -Gokhra, P.S./Tahasil- Narla, Dist- Kalahandi, Vide Annexure-4, Copy of affidavit  of complainant vide Annexure-5.
5. On being notice, the Op 2 & 3 appeared through their authorized representative and filed their written version. The OP 4 appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri G.K.Mohanty and filed their written version. The OP 5 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 5 in belated stage has not been accepted in view of Judgment  dt.4.3.2020 passed in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vrs. Hilli Multi Purpose Cold Storage . However, the AIC/OP 5 is allowed to participate in the further proceeding of this case without written version.  Opp.Party No.1 did not choose to appear in this case though notice has been properly served on 22.8.2022 through registered post vides Consignment No.RO 961106509 IN available there in the record.
6. The OP 2 & 3 have filed their written version admitting the fact that, the complainant is enrolled under PMFBY during Kharif 2021 as per Annexure 1 and that , the complainant is entitle for getting insurance benefit as per the notified actual yield (AY&TY) with respect to his enrolled Gram Panchyat Rakshi, Block –Narla,Dist-Kalahandi . The claim percentage of Rakshi GP is 48.42% as per Annexure-II of their written version. It is further contended that, the application of the farmer/complainant could not be approved due to lack of required documents, so his application got reverted by insurance company i.e. AIC of India Ltd. to the bucket of Common Service Centre but later on the documents were submitted by the farmer /complainant. Further it is submitted that, the insurance company /AIC was instructed by the State Level Technical Committee (SLTC) to consider the application which had been submitted on or before 30.06.2022. The documents submitted before 30.06.2022 was approved by the Insurance Company/Op -5  but the documents of this farmer/complainant  had been received  in the month of August, 2022 for which  the case of Kshetra Harijan/Complainant will be taken up only after decision of  the said State Level Technical Committee (SLTC )
7. The Op 4 /SBI Rupra Road filed their written version admitting the facts that, the complainant has SB A/c No.34653270653 maintained at SBI, Rupra Road branch .It  is further submitted that, the bank has no knowledge  about the deposit of alleged premium for insurance of crop grown in Kharif 2021. The alleged transaction was not made in the SBI, Rupra Road branch. It is further submitted that, the SBI Rupra Road has not received any deposit in respect of crop loss from any agriculture company in favour of the complainant. The loss in  agriculture insurance  was determine by the process as per the guideline of the government and the compensation also paid by the Central Government and State Government through Agriculture Insurance company where SBI, Rupra Road has no role to pay the compensation for loss of agricultural income. The account statement of the complainant does not show any such transaction in respect of the deposit of alleged insurance premiuṃ .The present OP, SBI, Rupra Road  has been falsely implicated in this case . With this submissions the OP 4/Bank urged to drop this complaint against the OP 4/Bank. To substantiate their pleading the OP 4/Bank has filed the account statements vide A/c No.34653270653 of the complainant for the period of 1.4.2021 to 31.8.2021.
8. Heard. Perused the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the submission of parties present.
9. After perusal of the complaint petition, written version and all the documents relied on by both the parties placed in the record, the points for consideration before this Commission is whether the complainant is entitled for the alleged crops insurance benefit under (P M F B Y) for the loss of crops grown Kharif 2021 and whether the Ops have deficient in service to settled the insurance claim of the complainant?
10. Learned Counsel for OP 5 /AIC draw our attention over 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 . Here in this case, there is no dispute that insurance premium is accepted by the insurer AIC/ OP 5.  
11. Learned Counsel for OP 5 /AIC further draw our attention on Para 17.6.4 of the revised guideline  that “in case of application submitted through CSCs, the farmer will be required to authenticate herself/himself using Aaadhar for filing of online application form . Having a bank account is essential for such case. In this case CSC-VLE will upload all requisite /desired supporting documents on portal while filing of the application form on behalf of the farmer. Application without requisite documents would not be considered for insurance coverage and CSC-VLE is responsible for proper filing of application form.” It is also contended there in the said guideline that : “Insurance Company should also reconcile the details of individual insured farmers uploaded on the portal  with the premium/consolidated  declaration receipt from each branch/nodal branch within the stipulated date and any deficiency/mismatch may be reported to the concerned bank branch/nodal bank. The bank branch/nodal bank should further send /upload the requisite information in respect of such farmers for whom clarification has been sought immediately within seven days.” There is also a duty cast in Para 17.12 of the revised guideline of PMFBY that:-“insurance company should verify and satisfy themselves about the coverage of farmers/crop and give acceptance to the application submitted by bank electronically through National Crop Insurance Portal.”  Para 17.13 of the said guideline contended that:-“ all insurance companies will compulsorily verify and take necessary action including approval/rejection of proposal or policy of any farmer through crop insurance portal within stipulated date.”
12. Learned Counsel for OP 5/AIC further submitted that, admittedly the complainant has insured his crop under PMFBY in Kharif 2021 under Rakshi GP of Narla Block ,Dist. Kalahandi through CSC. However, no documents were attached in NCIP which were relevant and mandatory for crop insurance. Repeated reminder were sent to the CSC for submission of documents of the petitioner but it was not responded for which OP 5/Insurance Company was bound to reject the application of the complainant/farmer explaining the reason there with that,  due to non attachment & non submission of required documents, the insurance policy was rejected.
    It is further submitted by admitting the facts that, subsequently, the petitioner farmer submitted documents which were received by the OP/Insurance Company after 30.06.2022. It is further submitted that, as no order from the State Government of Odisha has been received to check & approve the application received after cut up date of 30.06.2022, so the insurance coverage of the complainant is still in rejected state. It is further submitted by admitting the facts  that,  on being checked the documents of the complainant / farmer, it is  found  in order and that, the OP / Insurance Company is ready to approve the application once they received order from the  government of Odisha to approve those proposal received after due date i.e. 30.06.2022. With this submission the Learned Counsel for OP 5/AIC urged to dismiss this complaint claiming that there is no negligence and deficiency of service on the part of OP 5/Insurance Company.
13. Learned counsel for the  Op 4/Bank draw our attention on Para 8 (6)  & (7) of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Protection of Policyholders’ Interests) Regulations, 2017 as follows :-“ 8. PROPOSAL FOR INSURANCE: (6). Insurer shall process the proposals with speed and efficiency and the decision on the proposal thereof, shall be communicated in writing to the proposer within a reasonable period but not exceeding 15 days from the date of receipt of proposals or any requirements called for by the insurer. (7). Where a proposal deposit is refundable to a prospect under any circumstances, the same shall be refunded within 15 days from the date of underwriting decision on the proposal.”
14. It is learn that ,as per Para 27.1.1 of the revised PMFBY guideline- Bank and other financial institutions etc. shall be paid service charge @ 4% of the farmer share of premium by insurance company as generated from the portal and within the 15 days of finalization of business statistics. As such the CSC of SBI ,Rupra Road is serving for the insurance company receiving consideration for such service of remittance of premium and correct information to the insurance company and for any negligence/omission or commission on the part of the CSC/SBI Rupra road , the poor insured farmer /complainant should not be put into loss resulting frustration of very purpose of PMFBY of the government
15. Here, in this case the facts that, the complainant has paid premium of Rs.813.42 for sum insured of Rs. 40671.01 to the OP 5/AIC vide money receipt No.0401212100112481362 on dt.31.07.2021 towards insurance of paddy (dhan) crops grown over agriculture land vide plot No.769 of village Gokhra of Rakshi G.P of Kalahandi district measuring an areas of  Ac1.5000 i.e. 0.60703 hect is not disputed. The acknowledgement of premium receipt vide Annexure-1 of the complaint petition placed on record remaining unchallenged clearly shows that, the passbook, land record and showing certificate of the complainant has been attached there with the application remitted to the insurer/AIC. It is also admitted facts that, the insurer AIC /OP 5 has checked the application along with the documents submitted there with and found it in order and that ,the  OP 5/AIC is ready to approve the application of the complainant received after cut up date  i.e. 30.06.2022 awaiting   approval order of the Government of Odisha.
16. Here in this case, nothing cogent evidence whatsoever placed in the record that, the insurer/OP 5 has ever verified the information details of the insured farmer/complainant earliest or has ever notified that, said application under PMFBY for crops insurance during Kharif 2021 is received after the prescribed date i.e 30.06.2022 though a duty as such cast upon the insurer there in the revised guideline of PMFBY as well as  under section 8 (6) & (7) of the  of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Protection of Policyholders’ Interests) Regulations, 2017  as discussed above. Rather, the contention ANNEXURE -1 of the complainant petition remain unchallenged/un rebutted.
17. The OP No.3, here the representative of Government of Odisha, has admitted the fact that, 48.42% of paddy grown over the agriculture land situated within the Rakshi GP of Narla Block of , Dist.Kalahandi got damaged as per the report vide Annexure-II of their written version but the documents of the farmers including complainant was received after August,2022 for which the matter of the complainant will be taken up only after decision of the State Level Technical Committee (SLTC).
18. No cogent evidence is placed on record by either the Op 3 (the representative of the Govt. of Odisha) or by the AIC/OP 5 to prove/ hold that, the CSC application under PMFBY for crops insurance for the crops grown during Kharif 2021 submitted by the complainant /farmer along with required documents vide receipt No :0401212100112481362 dt. 31.07.2021 vide Annexure -1 of the complainant petition was received in  August ,2022 i.e after cut up date i.e 30.06.2022  . Law is well settled that, mere pleading shall not construe evidence for consideration.
19. The facts stated there in the receipt No :0401212100112481362 dt 31.07.2021 vide Annexure -1 of the complainant petition remain un-disputed. No iota of evidence is adduced to hold that, the OP 5/AIC has ever taken any steps to get the said application dt. 31.07.2021 of the complainant approved by SLTC for release of crop insurance benefit to the complainant or to have rejected the claim of the complainant earliest.
20. The PMFBY is a beneficial scheme of the government to protect the interest of the poor farmer. Here the complainant /farmer has suffered crop loss of 48.42 % grown over his agriculture land under Rakshi GP during Kharif 2021 is  proved as per undisputed facts contented there in annexure –I & II of the written version of OP 2 & 3 but his claim for release of insurance benefit under PMFBY is pending as on date awaiting approval in  the State Level Technical Committee (SLTC) of the government of Odisha for an uncertain period of time at the peril though there  is nothing cogent evidence placed on the record to hold that, said application of the complainant dt.31.07.2021 with required documents  for crops insurance is received by the insurance company/AIC after the cut –up date, certainly frustrated the very purpose of PMFBY for which the complainant suffered financial loss and mental agony may not be disputed/discarded.
21. The claim of crop insurance benefit of the complainant under beneficial scheme of PMFBY is neither accepted nor rejected as on date .No iota of evidence is placed on record to hold that, the AIC /OP 5 has ever taken any step to get approval for acceptance of application of the complainant/farmer rather sitting over the claim of complainant for an uncertain period of time at the peril and it has been enjoying the premium received from the farmer/complainant.
22. 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, the complainant is entitled for crop insurance benefit as claimed   in this complaint but not yet released by the insurer AIC  /Op 5 is an act of unfair trade practice & deficient in providing service on the part of Op 5/insurance company towards  the complainant for which  there is sufficient cause to brought this complainant and it is found in time  well maintainable under C.P .Act 2019.
23. Based on the above facts & circumstances and as per revised guideline we are of the opinion that, enjoying the premium received from the farmer/complainant and 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 insurance company AIC/OP 5 as such the AIC/op 5 is liable to compensate the complainant by way of releasing the insurance benefit to the complainant as claimed under PMFBY with interest @9% from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 20.07.20211 till its realization and further liable to pay litigation cost to the complainant . Hence it is ordered.

O R D E R

   This consumer complaint is allowed in part on contest against the OP 5/AIC  & dismissed against the other  Opp.Parties with the  following direction :- (i) The Agriculture  Insurance Company of India Ltd/ Opposite Party No. 5  is here by directed to release the  crops insurance benefit of Rs.19,692.90 i.e. @ 48.42% of the sum insured Rs.40671.01  under Pradhan Mantri Fasala Bima Yojana (PMFBY) with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filling of this complaint i.e. from dt.20.07.2022 till its realization and to pay  Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation cost to the compliant.

(ii) It is further directed to compliance the aforesaid order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order falling which the AIC/OP 5 shall be liable to pay Rs.500/-(five) per day as compensation to the complainant till compliance of this order and the C.E.O of the AIC/Op 5 shall be liable to be prosecuted under penal provision of Section 72 of C.P. Act 2019 on his own cost. The pending application if any is also stands disposed off accordingly.

Dictated & corrected by me.

I agree.

     Pronounced in open forum today on this 21^st June  2023 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.