BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 598 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 09.10.2019.
Date of Decision : 01.08.2023.
Sukhi Devi wife of Shri Shishpal, resident of village Nejia Khera, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Axis Bank Limited through its Manager, Sirsa, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.
2. Branch Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, 4th Floor, Plot No. 149, Industrial Area, Next to Hometel Hotel, Chandigarh- 160002.
3. District Agriculture Officer, Sirsa, District Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. B.L. Narula, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. R.K. Mehta, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
Sh. Satish Kumar, Statistical Assistant for opposite party no.3.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (after amendment u/s 35 of C.P. Act, 2019) against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs).
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is an agriculturist having her land measuring 39 kanals 09 marlas comprised in Sq. No. 124, Killa No. 9/1, 11, 12, 19, 20/1, 22, 23/1 situated in village Nejia Khera, Tehsil and District Sirsa and she alongwith her family is fully dependent upon agricultural income. The complainant is having her Kisan Credit card account number 917030027904851 with op no.1. That as per scheme of Central Government of India namely Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, the crop of complainant of rabi and kharif, 2017 was got insured by op no.1. It is further averred that op no.1 bank deducted premium amount for kharif crop of 2017 under PMFBY from the account of complainant and copy of khasra girdawari supplied by complainant to the op no.2 shown cotton crop in kharif, 2017 but the ops out of their mischievous whims shown paddy crop during season of kharif, 2017. It is further averred that whole of the Narma crop of kharif, 2017 sown by complainant was destroyed due to attack of rainy flood and natural calamity but all of the ops have failed to redress the grievances of the complainant and have failed to pay any compensation to the complainant for the damage of her insured cotton crop of kharif, 2017 despite her several requests and visits and all the ops have caused unnecessary harassment and financial loss to her. Hence, this complaint seeking claim amount at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per acre besides compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant has proposed in her loan application dated 28.02.2017 that she will sow crop of wheat as Rabi crop and crop of paddy as Kharif crop. According to pay the premium for insurance of related crops amount has been debited in the account of complainant and paid to op no.2. If complainant has changed the crop then it was her duty to inform the answering bank so it could be able to get insured the related crops. It is further submitted that crop of complainant has been got insured according to the proposal given by complainant. It is the duty of insurance company to visit the field of complainant and they have to insure the crops according to the status of land. In the present case, insurance company has accepted the premium without any objection as per notification dated 30.03.2018 and has never refunded the same, therefore, op no.2 is liable for making the payment of compensation to the complainant, if any. The matter of payment of compensation is between complainant and op no.2. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong. With these averments, dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 prayed for.
4. Op no.2 also filed written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that insurance company cannot be held liable for any mistake done either by complainant or by bank of complainant. That no intimation ever received regarding the loss of crop from the complainant as well as any other agencies. However, the claim of complainant was rejected as the crop loss occurred due to Rains but the same is not leading to Inundation which is covered for loss under the scheme and complainant has made a false, bogus and baseless story just to grab the compensation. It is further submitted that it is not an individual insurance policy like other insurance policies rather it is a group insurance scheme in accordance with agreed terms and conditions of scheme which are binding on all of concerned related to the scheme. The complainant should have approached to DAC & FW department for any kind of grievance related to scheme or claim and the decision of said department would be binding on all state Government/ Insurance Company/ Banks and farmers but instead of this, complainant has approached this Commission by violating standard terms and conditions of scheme. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. Op no.3 also filed its written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant never contacted to the answering op. The answering op is liable only to conduct the crop cutting experiments and yield basis claims are settled by the insurance company only on completion of other necessary formalities as prescribed in operational guidelines of scheme, which have already been given by the answering op within specific time period as prescribed in the operational guidelines of the Government of India. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.3 made.
6. The complainant in evidence has tendered her affidavit Ex.C1 and copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9, affidavit of Sh. Ajay son of Sh. Satbir Singh Ex.C9, certificate of Sarpanch of village Ex.C10 and further documents Ex.C11 to Ex.C13.
7. On the other hand, op no.3 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Babu Lal, Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sirsa as Ex.R1 and documents Ex.R2 and Ex.R3.
8. Op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Pankaj Saini, Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R4 and documents Ex.R5 and Ex.R6.
9. Op no.2 did not lead any evidence despite availing several opportunities.
10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as Sh. Satish Kumar, SA for op no.3 and have gone through the case file carefully.
11. The complainant in this case is claiming insurance claim amount for the damage of her cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. However, it is proved on record that while obtaining crop loan from the op no.1 bank, the complainant in her loan application dated 28.02.2017 (Ex.R5) declared that she will sow paddy crop in kharif season and wheat crop in rabi season and therefore, at the viability of paddy crop loan amount was sanctioned and paid to her. There is nothing on file to prove the fact that thereafter complainant ever informed the op no.1 bank that she has changed the pattern of crop and has sown cotton crop in her agricultural land and as such op no.1 bank deducted premium amount for insurance of paddy crop of complainant of kharif, 2017 and same was paid to op no.2 insurance company. Since only paddy crop of complainant was got insured by op no.1 bank through op no.2 as per own declaration of complainant and no cotton crop of complainant was insured, therefore, complainant is not entitled to claim amount on account of damage of cotton crop, if any. The evidence led by complainant in the shape of certificate of Sarpanch of village Nejia Khera that no paddy crop is sown in their village is not helpful to the complainant because complainant herself has declared that she will sow paddy crop in her land and therefore, now complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by her own act and conduct and complainant is not entitled to any compensation from any of the ops.
12. 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,
Dated: 01.08.2023. District Consumer Disputes
JK Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
