ORDER
(Passed on 11/03/2020)
PER SHRI. ATUL D. ALSI, PRESIDENT.
The complainants filed all four complaints against same insurance companies and subject matter of each complaint case is same, therefore all complaints decided by common judgement accordingly by taking facts of CC/19/20 as a sample case.
2. The complainant is farmer. The opposite party no. 1 is nodal bank who sanction insurance crop loan and insured soyabean and cotton crops with opposite party no. 2 agriculture insurance company. The complainant pludged soyabean in 2.5 acer of land and cotton in 10 acer and insured crop with opposite party no. 2 agriculture insurance company for the period between 2017 to 2018 for crop damage. The Complainant says their is less yield. There is loss of 56% yield to the farmer amounted to Rs. 45,000/- towards soyabean product and 2,50,000/- towards the cotton product and as per report submitted by Tahsildar Warora dist. chandrapur wide letter no. 207/rev. dated 3/11/15 adress to district collector chandrapur the survey report says there is loss of 56% to the farmers as per Aanewari survey report at mouze Javulka tq. Warora dist. Chandrapur.
3. After repeated demand by complainant the opposite party no. 1 and opposite party no. 2 failed to disturbs the insurance claim of farmer therefore complainant issued legal notice through adv. shaikh on 2/1/19 but opposite parties failed to comply the notice therefore pettion is filed to compensate the loss of Rs. 45,000/- towards the soyabean product and 2,50,000/- towards the cotton product along with 9% interest and prayed for compensation of 50,000/- with cost of litigation Rs. 30,000/-.
4. The opposite party no. 1 filed reply and admitted that the complainant is farmer and insured cotton and soyabean crop under crop insurance scheme for the year 2017-18 against yearly premium of Rs. 2018/- uder the Pradhan Mantri crop insurance scheme of Central Goverment. The opposite party no. 1 is the nodal bank and insured crop as per the direction of central Goverment.The opposite party no. 1 further submitted that the complainant is farmer and insured soyabaean and cotton crops for the year 2017-18 against premium of Rs. 2018/- under Pradhan Mantri crop insurance scheme. The opposite party no. 1 insurance the crop of loanee farmers as per the direction of Central Goverment through accounts of farmers with opposite party no.2 and paid necessary insurance premium and discharged the duty and no concern with loss of crop. For the loss of crop the opposite party no. 2 is liable. The yield is depend upon the of seeds used and fertily of land and utilisation of water. The complainant failed to submit the proof loss of crop from competant authority recognised by central goverment as the condition of crop insurance. The opposite party no. 1 has no role in respect of compensation for crop insurance. Hence the petittion may be dismissed against opposite party no. 1
5. The opposite party no. 2 filed reply and denied allegations and submitted that as per goverment resolution the 2017/case no 1/11/a dated 20/06/2017 pradhan mantri crop insurance scheme being implemented in 11 districts including Chandrapur which mandatory for loanee farmers for the crop loan during Kharip season for 1/4/17 to 31/6/18 and optional for non loanee farmers. The insurance claims are payable in only thouse notified area where actual yield of notified crop for current season falls short of threshold yield of that crop for that notified area. It is further submitted in reply that as per notified area wise the acutual yield data submitted by directorate of agricutural department of maharashtra state and threshold yield data for cotton and soyabean crops in Madheli revene circle tq Warora dist. Chandrapur under Pradhan Mantri crop insurance scheme 2017 the claims are not payable as short fall in yield is not observed while report isssued by Chief statistian commissionarate of agriculture of maharashtra state pune vide report PMFBY/ STAT8/ AICAY /KH/17/144/2018 dated 27/2/2018 and as per state goverment resolution case no 1/11/yo-2017 dated 20/6/2017 read as only statistical survey report isssued by agriculture commissionate of state goverment will be considered and not of any report submitted goverment or any institution is admissible in awarding compensation under crop insurance and also Aanewari system can not be considered for the settlement of claim under the scheme therefore the petition is deserve to be dismissed with cost.
6. Both counsel submitted their pursis as there petition and reply may be considered as Notes of argument.
Points Finding
- Whether the complainant is consumer? Yes
- Whether there is deficiency on the part opposite parties in
repudation of claim? No
REASONNING
As to issue No. 1 and 2.
7. The complainant insured crop by paying premium from his bank account hence complaint is Consumer. As per scheme of Pradhan Mantri crop insurance scheme and guildline is to approach on "area approach " or "defined area" for each notified crop for wide spread calamities and insurance unit is village panchayat or other equivalent unit for major crops and the claim shall be calculated as per the formula (threshold yield - actual yield) / threshold yield multiply by sum assured. As per report submitted by Directorate agriculture of state notified area wise the acutual yield data submitted by Directorate of agricutural department of Maharashtra state and threshold yield data for cotton and soyabean crops in Madheli revene circle tq Warora dist. Chandrapur under Pradhan Mantri crop insurance scheme 2017 the claims are not payable as short fall in yield is not observed while report isssued by Chief statistian commissionarate of agriculture of maharashtra state pune vide report PMFBY /STAT8 /AICAY/KH/17/144/2018 dated 27/2/2018. The claims under the madheli revenue circle are not payable as a short fall in the yield as not observed. As per Goverment resolution the statistical survey report about loss notified in crop insurance scheme issued by agricultural commisssionarate of state Goverment will only be considered and not any other report submitted by Goverment or any institution is admissible in calculating the loss of crop and aanewari method can not be considered for claim settelment under PMFBY/KHARIP/2017. Therefore the report of agricultural commissionarete of state is sole document on which the compenstation to be awareded. Therefore the rejection of insurance claim does not amount to defeciency of service. Hence petition is dismissed.
ORDER
1) The complaint no. cc/19/19, cc/19/20, cc/19/21, cc/19/22 are dismissed by common judgement.
2) No order as to costs.
3) The certified copy of Judgement be provided to the parties free of costs.
(Smt. Kalpana Jangade(Kute) (Smt. Kirti Vaidya(Gadgil) (Shri.Atul D. Alsi)
Member Member President
