BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 272 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 26.10.2020.
Date of Decision : 27.07.2023.
Ravinder Kumar son of Sh. Rai Singh, resident of village Kairanwali, Tehsil Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Canara Bank Main Branch Surkhab Chowk, Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa through its Divisional Manager.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Vinod Kumar, Authorized Representative for complainant.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
In brief, the case of complainant is that he is having his KCC account number 1403840006716 with op no.1. That on 27.07.2018 premium amount of Rs.3314.40 was deducted from his account for insurance of his kharif crop of 2018 but the data of the said amount were not uploaded on the online portal by the officers of the bank. It is further averred that the claim of paddy and cotton crop of village Kairanwali of kharif, 2018 was received but complainant did not receive any claim amount due to the reason of non uploading of data on the online portal due to negligence of officers of the op bank. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, op no.1 bank appeared and filed reply raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that for insurance of kharif crop of 2018 of complainant, the answering op approached and requested the complainant for supply of his adhar card because adhar number was required for uploading the data of the insurance of the crops of complainant but he did not supply the same. However, the answering op contacted many times to the complainant over telephone and written letter on 30.07.2018 and 07.08.2018 but inspite of receipt of these letters, the complainant did not supply his adhar card. It is further submitted that however answering op has got his kharif 2018 crop as declared by him got insured with insurance company but in absence of adhar car, the insurance data could not be uploaded on the portal. It is the liability of insurance company to indemnify the loss if any of the crops of complainant and answering op has not charged any penny for itself on account of any insurance of crops of complainant. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
3. OP no.2 on being impleaded appeared after notice and filed written statement. It is submitted that op no.1 bank is liable for consequences for supplying false, incorrect information in order to avoid their liability and with intent to shifting the liability on answering op deliberately the bank is submitting that complainant did not supply the aadhar card, resultantly they were not able to upload the data on portal. Thereafter bank is submitting that bank has got his kharif 2018 as declared by him got insured with insurance company and insurance premium has been transferred in the account of insurance company for the insurance of declared crops of complainant, but in the absence of adhar number of complainant the insurance data could not be uploaded on the portal. It is submitted that when data has not been uploaded on portal, then question of insurance does not arise and complaint against answering op is liable to be dismissed. It is further submitted that if there is any technical flaw, fault or mistake clerical or otherwise on the part of bank in uploading the entire data record by the bank or State Agency of the premium amount has been deposited with the company without uploading complete detail (data/ record of loanee as required according to guidelines) in that eventuality insurance company cannot be held responsible or liable for making the payment of loss, if any suffered by such loanee/ farmer and bank is liable for the same as per clause 17.2 of operational guidelines. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW2/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5. The complainant has also placed on file report of Deputy Director Agriculture department Sirsa at the time of arguments as mark C1.
5. On the other hand, op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Ms. Puja Incharge Legal Hub as Ex.R1 and operational guidelines of PMFBY Ex.R2.
6. Op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Ajay Kumar Manager as Ex.R1 and documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R5.
7. We have heard authorized representative for complainant and learned counsel for ops no.1 and 2 and have perused the case file carefully.
8. The complainant in order to prove loss to the cotton and paddy crop of his village Kairanwali in Kharif, 2018 has placed on file report/ letter of the Deputy Director Agriculture, Sirsa dated 16.05.2023 mark C1 according to which the average yield of cotton crop of village Kairanwali in Kharif, 2018 was 304.97 Kgs. per hectare and the threshold yield of cotton crop of block Nathusari Chopta was 561.06 Kgs. per hectare. Further according to report mark C1, the average yield of paddy crop of village Kairanwali in kharif, 2018 was 2011.83 kgs. per hectare and threshold yield of paddy crop of block Nathusari Chopta of kharif, 2018 was 2437.02 Kgs. per hectare. Since the average yield of both the crops in village Kairanwali of kharif, 2018 was less than threshold yield of block Nathusari Chopta, therefore, it is proved on record that there was loss to the cotton and paddy crop of complainant in village Kairanwali in kharif, 2018. From the copy of statement of account of complainant Ex.C1, it is evident that on 27.07.2018 premium amount of Rs.3314.40 was deducted by op no.1 bank for insurance of kharif crops of 2018 of complainant and said amount was to be paid by op no.1 bank to the insurance company i.e. op no.2 for insurance of above said crops of complainant. But however, the op no.2 insurance company has specifically asserted that answering op did not receive any premium against account number of complainant, name of farmer and land mentioned and referred by complainant and as such the crops of complainant was not insured with it. In this regard op no.1 bank has taken the plea that as complainant failed to supply his aadhar card which was mandatory for insurance of crops despite their repeated demands, therefore, his data could not be uploaded on the portal. The perusal of detailed statement of account of complainant Ex.C4 also reveals that on 18.09.2020 i.e. after more than two years of deduction of above said amount of Rs.3314.45, said amount of Rs.3314.45 was refunded back to the account of complainant by the op no.1 bank. The op no.1 bank has also placed on file letter dated 30.07.2018 Ex.R2 allegedly written to the complainant for submission of aadhar for MPFBY Kharif, 2018 and has also placed on file reminder dated 7.8.2018 Ex.R3. In these letter/ reminder, the op no.1 bank has written that aadhar number of the farmer is to be remapped meaning thereby that op no.1 bank was already having aadhar number of the complainant with it. Further more, a simpleton farmer resident of a village hardly understands the English and even the meaning of remapping is not understood by a little literate person. Even the op no.1 has not explained that what is the mean of remapping of aadhar number and that aadhar number needs any remapping. Further more as the premium amount has been refunded back by the op no.1 bank after a long period of more than two years, therefore, it appears that in order to conceal its mistake and to avoid any liability, the op no.1 bank has produced above said letters alongwith record about sending of the letters through registered covers and as such manipulation of these letters and record cannot be ruled out and it only appears that production of said record is only afterthought of op no.1 bank. The op no.1 bank has only refunded the premium amount after more than two years of its deduction of premium amount. So, we are of the considered opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of op no.1 bank.
9. Now we assess the loss of cotton and paddy crop of kharif, 2018 of complainant. It is proved on record that complainant has declared to the op no.1 bank that he is sowing cotton crop in his land measuring 0.8097 hectare and paddy crop in his land measuring 0.4049 hectare. The sum insured amount of paddy crop in kharif, 2018 was Rs.73500/- and sum insured amount of cotton crop in kharif, 2018 was Rs.72000/-. So, the complainant is entitled to claim amount of Rs.26,610/- for loss of his cotton crop in his land measuring 0.8097 hectare and further entitled to claim amount of Rs.5192/- for the loss of his paddy crop of kharif, 2018 as per formula for calculation of loss given in the operational guidelines of PMFBY. As per Clause 17.2 of the operational guidelines of PMFBY which 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 to them. Therefore, as per said clause, the op no.1 bank only is liable to pay the above said amounts to the complainant. In this regard, the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Haryana, Panchkula in a similar case titled as The Branch Manager, Corporation Bank now merged with Union Bank of India Versus Rupinder Singh and others Appeal No. 803 of 2022 decided on 11.01.2023 has also held that “As per provision 17.2 of operational guidelines of PMFBY for difference of claim due to wrong information, if any, concerned bank/ intermediaries were responsible”. The said judgment of the Hon’ble State Commission Haryana is also applicable in this case.
10. In view of our above discussion, we allow this complaint qua opposite party no.1 bank and direct the op no.1 bank to pay the above said claim amounts of Rs.26,610/- and Rs.5192/- to the complainant for the loss of his cotton and paddy crop of Kharif, 2018 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 above said amounts alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment. We also direct the op no.1 bank to further pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. However, complaint qua op no.2 stands dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced. Member President
Dt. 27.07.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
JK
