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.66701.18/- and further pray for an award of compensation of Rs.30,000/-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 she  had cultivated Paddy Crops  over agriculture land vide  Plot No.767,147,433,149,856,315,& 857 measuring an areas of 0.9955 Hect which are recorded in the name of her  great grandfather-in-law under ROR/ Khatian 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 insurance premium of Rs.1,334/- vide Money Receipt No. 040121210010208272802 for sum assured of Rs 66701.18/- 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. declared 64.97 % short fall for award of insurance benefit to the distress farmers .Accordingly co-farmers have already received their crops insurance benefits under PMFBY but no insurance benefit is released to the complainant because of the negligence & deficient services of op/insurance company . Hence, this complaint.
4. To substantiate her claim the complainant has filed the self attested true copy of her Aadhar Card , Copy of SB Account No. 33758292101 of SBI Farang, copy of money receipt Money Receipt Vide No. 040121210010208272802 dt.9/7/2021 , 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. 5050/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 as such Govt. has gdeclared 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   but failed to file their written version on stipulated period of time as prescribed under C.P.Act. The written version filed in a belated stage has not accepted in view of judgment & order dt.04.03.2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in New India Assurance Co.ltd vrs Hilly Multi Purposes Cold Storage Ltd). Thus contentions of complainant remain unchallenged. However, the Op AIC /insurer is allowed to take part in the hearing & argument of this case. 
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 got damaged during Kharif 2021 for which Govt. has declared as 64.97% short fall yield .
10. During hearing of the case learned counsel for the OP/AIC   denied the complaint allegation of negligence & deficiency of services .He further submits that,  the claim of the complainant is rightly approved in part.AIC has  approved insurance of crops grown over  plot no. 433, 147  & rejected the insurance of crop over plot no. 767,856,857,149  due to lack of insurable interest & over –insurance of crops grown there over those land . It is further submits that, the  OP/AIC  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 of action arose for this complaint as such this complaint  need to be dismissed with cost.
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. The revised guideline of PMFBY 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. It is seen 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 PMFBY guideline further 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 found that, the complainant has insured the crops grown over  agriculture land vide  Plot No.767, 147, 433, 149, 856, 315 & 857 measuring an areas of 0.9955 Hect recorded in the name of her  great grandfather-in-law father  under ROR/ Khata No.158 of  village/Mouza –Karli , GP-Rengsapali, Block -Golamunda , Dist- Kalahandi, with  Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd under PMFBY  and insurance premium of Rs.1334/- vide Money Receipt No. 040121210010208272802  for sum assured of Rs 66701.18/- was successfully paid  to the op AIC/Insurance company through CSC as non-Loanee farmer remain unchallenged.
16. The complainant draws the attention of this Commission over  the revised guideline of PMFBY and most specifically on Coverage of Farmers vide clause 3.1 :- “All farmers including sharecroppers and tenant farmers growing the notified crops in the notified areas are eligible for coverage. However, farmers should have insurable interest for the notified/insured crops. The non-loanee farmers are required to submit necessary documentary evidence of land records prevailing in the State (Records of Right (RoR), Land possession Certificate (LPC) etc.) and/ or applicable contract/ agreement details/ other documents notified/ permitted by concerned State Govt. in case of sharecroppers/tenant farmers and the same should be defined by the respective States in the notification itself”.
17. This Commission is of the opinion that, the complainant is not entitled to get over insured his crops .The insurer is at liberty to reject the proposal/application for crops insurance within the stipulated time period as prescribed under PMFBY giving an intimation to the insured farmer/complainant and also giving an opportunity to rectify the application/proposal form if it found defective or over insured.
18. 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 within the stipulated time period as prescribed under PMFBY 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 crop insurance. The premium received  is not yet returned back to  complainant though a duty  cast upon the insurer there in the revised guideline of PMFBY to compulsorily verify and take necessary action including approval/rejection of proposal or policy of any farmer through crop insurance portal within stipulated date ”as discussed above.
19. The submission of learned counsel for the   OP/AIC that, they have already paid the eligible claim of the complainant for the loss of crops grown over plot no. 433 & 147 is not disputed by the complainant.
20. 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 agriculture land vide Plot No.767, 856, 857,149, 315 is not proper .
21. Admittedly crops insurance benefit is not yet released which proved negligence & deficient service there on the part of the OP AIC /insurer caused financial loss & mental agony to the complainant cannot be denied 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 .
22. The Chief District Agriculture Officer/Op 2 vide letter no. 5050/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 crops grown over the plot no.  767, 856, 857,149, 315 i.e @ 64.97% of (Rs.11,930.02 +Rs.8,676.50+Rs. 23,589.36 + Rs. 13,828.13+ 5287.64 ) =Rs. 41133.57/-  with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filling of this complaint i.e from 19.02.2024 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 AIC / OP1&3 and 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. 41,133.57 under PMFBY with interest @9% from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. from 19.02.2024 till its realization to the complainant 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 compliance 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 11^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.