BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 302 of 2019
Date of Institution : 10.06.2019.
Date of Decision : 09.03.2022.
1. Balkaran Singh aged about 42 years son of Shri Tarsem Singh,
2. Swaran Singh aged about 32 years son of Shri Tarsem Singh, residents of village Ganga, Sub Tehsil Goriwala, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa.
……Complainants.
Versus.
HDFC Bank Ltd. through its Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Chautala Road, Opposite Nirankari Bhawan, Mandi Dabwali, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa.
...…Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR …………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………MEMBER.
SH. SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA………… MEMBER
Present: Sh. Ashish Singla, Advocate for complainants.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
The complainants have filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (after amended as under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) against the opposite party (herein after referred as OP) on the averments that complainants are agriculturists having about 144 kanals of land comprised in Khewat Nos. 1383, 668 situated at village Ganga, Tehsil Goriwala, District Sirsa. The complainants have availed KCC facility from the op on their above said agricultural land through account number 50200011054420. As per scheme of Government of India namely Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, for insurance of crops of Kharif, 2016 and Rabi 2016-17 of complainant, the premium was deducted on 17.8.2016 and 10.1.2017 respectively by the op from the above account of complainants and crop was insured with the then collaborated insurance company of the bank. That simultaneously on 31.7.2017 for insurance of cotton crop of Kharif, 2017, a sum of Rs.10,046/- was again deducted by op and this time, the op had got insured the crop from insurance company, the name of which is to be disclosed by the op and op did not supply the copy of insurance policy despite their request. Subsequently also, the op deducted premium amounts for insurance of crop of complainants of Rabi 2017-2018 and Kharif, 2018. It is further averred that the crop in their village of Kharif, 2017 including crop of complainants was destroyed on account of natural calamities and as such, the complainants are entitled to get compensation on account of damage to their crops to the tune of Rs.25,000/- per acre. The complainants approached the op and requested for the claim amount but even after passing of more than 1½ years, they did not get any claim whereas some of the villagers have already received compensation. The complainants were surprised to know from the officials of op that cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of complainants had not been insured despite deduction of insurance premium. They were further told that amount of insurance premium was returned back in their account after 2/3 days of its deduction and no intimation or any notice in this regard was given. That even on being asked time and again, the op failed to show any reason for non insurance of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 and also for refund of the premium. The op verbally told that the amount of premium was transferred to the insurance company for insurance of crop and it is the fault of insurance company regarding non insurance whereas op is not even disclosing the name of insurance company to whom the premium was paid after deduction. The agriculture work is only source of their livelihood. That complainants again approached the op and requested them to compensate under the said scheme of Government but the op about a week ago flatly refused to admit the genuine claim of complainants. That such act and conduct on the part of op clearly amounts to negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, this complaint.
2. Op was served and filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections qua non maintainability of complaint, no cause of action and suppression of material facts and estoppal. On merits, it is submitted that an amount of Rs.10,046/- was debited on 31.7.2017 from the account of complainants to pay the insurance premium for the Kharif crop. Official of the bank called the complainant to provide KYC required for crop insurance for submission to insurance company alongwith insurance premium. The complainant no.2 came present to the bank and submitted letter regarding his further proposed crop and asked that he will sow crop of Guar in the area of 18 acre. He also asked that insurance is not required for the crop of Guar, hence insurance premium debited in his account on 31.7.2017 was again credited in account of complainants on 2.8.2017 and in this way, Kharif crop of complainants could not be insured. It is further submitted that Guar crop was not damaged in the area of village Ganga. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
3. The complainants have tendered affidavit of Balkaran Singh complainant as Ex.CW1/A, copy of application seeking RTI Ex.C1, copy of letter of Agriculture department, Sirsa Ex.C2, copy of report received under RTI from Agriculture department, Sirsa Ex.C3, copy of notification of Haryana Government dated 13.6.2017 Ex.C4, copy of formula regarding assessment of claims Ex.C5, copy of jamabandi Ex.C6, copy of khasra girdawaris Ex.C7, copy of statement of account Ex.C8, copies of jamabandis Ex. C9, Ex.C10, copy of adhar card of Balkaran Singh complainant Ex.C11 and copy of adhar card of complainant Swaran Singh Ex.C12.
4. On the other hand, Op has tendered affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Mehta, Assistant Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R1, writing/ letter of complainant disclosing about sowing of crop Ex.R2 and copy of statement of account Ex.R3.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
6. The record reveals that complainants in order to prove their case have furnished affidavit of complainant Balkaran Singh as Ex.CW1/A in which he has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. The complainants have also placed on file copy of statement of account Ex.C8, the perusal of which reveals that on 31.7.2017, premium amount of Rs.10,046/- was deducted by op bank for insuring the Kharif crop of 2017 of complainants and it also reveals that on 2.8.2017 i.e. just within two days, the premium amount of Rs.10,046/- deducted by op bank on 31.7.2017 from the accounts of complainant was remitted back in their account. The complainants have alleged that due to negligence of op bank, their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 could not be insured with the insurance company and as such the op bank is liable to pay the claim amount for the damage of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. In this regard, complainants have also placed on record copy of report of Agriculture Department, Sirsa as Ex.C3 to show that there was damage to the crop in village Ganga, but however, said report is not helpful to the complainants because name of crop is not mentioned in this report, so it is not clear from this report Ex.C3 that to what crop damage was caused in village Ganga in Kharif, 2017. Further more, bank has taken a specific stand that after deduction of premium from the accounts of complainants on 31.7.2017 for insuring their crops of Kharif, 2017, the complainant no.2 personally visited the bank and declared that they will sow Guar crop in Kharif, 2017 and there is no need for insurance of their Guar crop and as such premium amount was remitted back in their accounts just within two days i.e. on 2.8.2017 and as such their crop of Kharif, 2017 was not insured. In this regard, op bank has also placed on file writing/letter of complainant Swaran Singh wherein it is mentioned that they will sow Guar crop in Kharif, 2017.
7. Since, complainant himself visited the bank and has given in writing as per Ex.R2 that they will sow the crop of Guar which is not covered as per Haryana Government Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department Notification dated 13.6.2017 and at the behest of complainant, premium was refunded to the account of complainants by the bank after two days, now complainants are estopped by their own act and conduct from filing the present complaint. Further, as complainant Swaran Singh himself has shown willingness in writing to sow crop of Guar instead of crops which is covered under insurance scheme, therefore, khasra girdawaris are not helpful to the complainants. The premium amount was deducted on 31.7.2017 for insurance of crop of complainants but as complainants raised objection for deduction of premium amount from their accounts, so same was returned back in their account on 2.8.2017 i.e. just within two days, therefore, it cannot be said that op bank is at fault for not insuring the crop of complainants. So, complaint of the complainants deserve dismissal.
8. In view of our above discussion, there is no 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 free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated:09.03.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
