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) .
2. The complainant seeks for an order directing the Ops to release the   crops insurance benefit of Rs.79,318.94/- and further pray for an award of compensation of Rs.50,000/-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, complainant is a farmer by occupation. During Kharif  season 2021 he  had cultivated Paddy Crops  over agriculture land vide  Plot No.767,77,147,& 855 measuring an areas of Ac.6.100dcl recorded in the name of his father under  under ROR/ Khata No.158 of  village/Mouza –Karli , GP-Rengsapali, Block -Golamunda , Dist- Kalahandi. He had insured those  crops with Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd under PMFBY  and accordingly insurance premium of Rs.849.99/- vide Money Rreceipt No. 0401212100105449858  for sum assured of Rs 42501.45/- and Rs. 748.3O/-  vide Money Receipt No. 040121210010697344007 for sum assured of Rs. 37417.49/- was successfully paid  to the op AIC/Insurance company through CSC as non-Loanee farmer. It is further contended that said insured Paddy crops  grown in  Kharif  2021 got damaged  for which govt. 64.97 % short fall for award of insurance benefit to the distress farmers accordingly co-farmers have already received their insurance benefits under PMFBY but no insurance benefit is released to the complainant due to negligence & deficient services of op/insurance company . Hence, this complaint.
4. To substantiate his claim the complainant has filed the self attested true copy of his Aadhar Card , Copy of SB Account No. 31150361486 of SBI Farang, copy of money receipt Money Money Rreceipt Vide No. 0401212100105449858  & Money Receipt No. Vide 040121210010697344007, Copy of ROR vide Khata No.158 village/Mouza –Karli ,Ps-Golamunda, Dist- Kalahandi, .The complaint petition is supported by an affidavit of the complainant.
5. On being notice, the Chief District Agriculture Officer/Op 2 submits their reply vide letter no. 5052/Agril. Dt. 15/03/24 admitting the facts that, during Kharif  2021 the paddy Crops in Rengsapali GP of Golamunda Block of Kalahandi district got damaged and declared as 64.97% short fall yield .The details parameters are as follows :- Threshold Yield :- 2507 Kg/ha. Actual Yield : 878 Kg/ha ,Shortfall yield: 1629 Kg/ha.
6. The Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd /OP 1&3 respectively appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri P.K.Bhoi  and filed their written version denying the complaint allegation of negligence & deficiency of services .The Op AIC/Insurance company sybmits that the claim of the complainant is rightly approved in part & rejected in part due to lack of insurable interest as there was over –insurance of said land .The Op/insurance company has already paid the eligible claim of the complainant and the complainant is no more entitled to get further any insurance benefit rather there is no cause o0f action arose for this complaint need to be dismissed with cost.
7. Heard. Peruse the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the submission of rival parties present.
8. Here in this case, there is no dispute that, insurance premium is accepted by the insurer Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd.
9. The insurer /AIC has not disputed the insurance of crops of the complainant grown during Kharif   2021 so also not disputed the receipt of premium  paid through CSC as non-loanee farmer. It is also not disputed that, insured crops of the complainant grown in village Karli under Rengsapali  Gram Panchyat  of Golamunda Block ,Dist. Kalahandi during Kharif  damaged & Govt. has declared as 64.97% short fall yield .
10. The learned counsel for the insurance OP/AIC submits that, there is no negligence or deficiency of services on the part of the op/insurance company and that, the claim of the complaints were rightly rejected in part due to lack of insurable interest as there was insurable interest as there was over –insurance .
11. Learned Counsel for OP  /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.”
12. 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.”
13. The complainant submits that there is 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.” 
14. 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.”
15. It is seen that the complainant has insured the crops grown over plot no. 857,767, & 149 was  insured twice and premium is paid under both Money Receipt Vide No. 0401212100105449858  & Money Receipt No. Vide 040121210010697344007, as non loanee farmer though Plot No 77 is insured once paying  premium with this respect under said Money Receipt Vide No. 0401212100105449858  . All those plots are recorded under same RPOR/Khata No.158 of village –Karli, Ps-Golamunda , Dist-Kalahandi.
16. This Commission is of the opinion that, the complainant is not entitled to insured his crops grown over the same plots twice and if so, than any one proposal /application for insurance was to be rejected within the stipulated time period as prescribed under PMFBY with intimation to the insured farmer/complainant but not both the application unitarily.
17. Nothing cogent evidence whatsoever placed in the record to hold that, the insurer/OP AIC has ever verified the proposal /application of the complainant & information details of the insured farmer/complainant earliest or has ever notified that, the complainant has  over insured & has  no insurable interest rather rejected unitarily is not proper. There is nothing material placed on the record to hold that the insurer/AIC has ever asked the complainant directly or through concerned CSC to rectify the application/proposal for insurance or have returned back the premium received twice from the complainant for the crops grown there over the same agricultural land though a duty as such is cast upon the insurer there in the revised guideline of PMFBY as discussed above.
18. Based on the above discussion, this Commission is of the opinion that, denial of crops insurance benefit to the complainant with respect loss of  Paddy crops grown during Kharif 2021  over Plot No. 77 for sum assured of Rs 7863.12/- , over plot no. 857 for sum assured of Rs 11794.68/-,plot no. 767 for sum assured of Rs 5965.01/-,plot no. 149 for sum assured of Rs 6914.40/-  receiving premium there for  is not proper rather, it proved negligence & deficient service there on the part of the OP AIC /insurer which  caused financial loss & mental agony to the complainant cannot be denied. This Commission is of the opinion that, the complainant is entitled get release of crops insurance benefit for the loss of crops grown over subject land vide plots Nos.. 77, 857, 767 & 149 during Kharif 2021.
19. Admittedly crops insurance benefit is not yet released as such this commission is of the opinion that, there is sufficient cause to brought this complainant before this Commission and it is found on time well maintainable under C.P .Act 2019
20. The Chief District Agriculture Officer/Op 2 vide his letter no. 5052/Agril. Dt. 15/03/24 has informed this Commission that , during Kharif  2021 the paddy Crops in Rengsapali GP of Golamunda Block of Kalahandi district got damaged and declared as 64.97% short fall yield remain undisputed .  As such the complainant is entitled to get release of crops insurance benefit under PMFBY for loss Kharif 2021 @ 64.97% of sum assured with respect to Plot Nos.  77, 857, 767 & 149 i.e @ 64.97% of (Rs.7863.12 +Rs.11794.68+Rs. 5965.01 + Rs. 6914.40) =Rs. 21,139.42/- with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filling of this complaint i.e from 23.02.2024 till its realization and further the OP/AIC is liable to pay compensation of not less than Rs 5000/- towards mental agony and litigation cost of Rs 3000/- to the complainant. Hence it is ordered.

O R D E R

This consumer complaint is allowed in part on contest against the OPs /AIC  & dismissed against the other  Opp.Parties with the  following   direction :-

(i) The Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd/ Opposite Party No. 1& 3 authorities are here by directed to release the crops insurance benefit of Rs. Rs. 21,139.42/- under PMFBY with interest @9% from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. from 19.02.2024 till its realization and further directed to pay compensation of Rs 5000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 3000/-towards litigation cost to the complainant.

ii) 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 insurance company AIC/OP  shall be liable to pay additional Rs.100/-(one hundred) per day as compensation to the complainant till compliance of this order and the C.E.O of the AIC/Op  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.

President

I agree.

                               Member

      Pronounced in open forum today on this 10^th July  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.