BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 416 of 2019
Date of Institution : 05.08.2019.
Date of Decision : 09.03.2022.
Gurdeep Singh aged about 45 years son of Shri Mukhtiar Singh, resident of village Ganga, Sub Tehsil Goriwala Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
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 complainant.
Sh. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
The complainant has 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 complainant is agriculturist having about 105 kanals 5 marlas of land situated at village Ganga, Tehsil Goriwala, District Sirsa. The complainant has availed KCC facility from the op on his above said agricultural land through account number 50200016087900. 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 complainant 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.7879.80 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 complainant of Rabi 2017-2018 and Kharif, 2018. It is further averred that the crop in their village of Kharif, 2017 including crop of complainant was destroyed on account of natural calamities and as such, the complainant is entitled to get compensation on account of damage to his crop to the tune of Rs.35,000/- per acre. The complainant approached the op and requested for the claim amount but even after passing of more than 1½ years, he did not get any claim whereas some of the villagers have already received compensation. The complainant was surprised to know from the officials of op that cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of complainant had not been insured despite deduction of insurance premium. He was further told that amount of insurance premium was returned back in his 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 his 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 his livelihood. That complainant 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 complainant. 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. It is submitted that as per the term of Prime Minister Fasal Bima Yojna (PMFBY scheme), which was launched by Hon’ble Prime Minister of India on 13.2.2016, for the farmers who have sought crop loan from any Financial Institutions, it was mandatory for the Banks to insure all the borrowers under the scheme. The premium of the insurance was to be deducted from the account of borrower and was to be paid to the insurance company by the bank. In the present case, the bank has debited the premium amount from the account of complainant as insurance premium for Kharif, 2017 on 31.7.2017. As per clause 6.3.1 of revised operational guidelines of PMFBY, the adhar card is mandatory for availing crop insurance from Kharif, 2017 season onward. The one of the officials of ICICI Lombard, Shri Deepak Gupta also informed the answering op in clarification that as per newly issued communication from Ministry of Agriculture Farmer Welfare, Adhar Card was mandatory for enrolment for all the farmers. As such detail regarding some accounts could not be uploaded on the portal of the insurance company due to non availability of the adhar card and the amount debited in their account was not remitted to the insurance company and was kept in the sundry account.
3. It is further submitted that complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present complaint against answering op. In fact, at the time of sanction of loan, the complainant had executed a declaration and undertaking that “As per your bank policy crop insurance is a pre-condition. However, I am not interested in incurring expenditure on crop insurance premium. I/We undertake entire responsibility for repayment of the crop loan availed from your bank alongwith interest even if the crops are failed due to nature calamities or for any other reasons”. It is further submitted that after debit of amount of premium, the message was sent to complainant and thereafter he alongwith office bearer of Kisan Union visited the Bank premises on 2.8.2017 and shown his grievance regarding transfer of amount for insurance of crop as they had not authorized the bank to get his crop insured. He was advised to deposit adhar card with the Bank but he refused to get the crop insured, as such the premium amount was remitted back in his account. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant has tendered his affidavit 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 khasra girdawari Ex.C6, copies of pass book and statement of account Ex.C7, Ex.C8, copies of jamabandis Ex.C9, Ex.C10 and copy of adhar card Ex.C11.
5. On the other hand, Op has tendered affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Mehta, Assistant Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R1, copy of statement of account Ex.R2 and copies of authorization/ declaration and undertakings Ex.R3 & Ex.R4.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
7. The record reveals that complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. The complainant has also placed on file copy of statement of account Ex.C8, the perusal of which alongwith Ex.R2 reveals that on 31.7.2017, premium amount of Rs.7879.80 was deducted by op bank for insuring the Kharif crop of 2017 of complainant and same also reveals that on 2.8.2017 i.e. just within two days, the premium amount of Rs.7879.80 deducted by op bank on 31.7.2017 from the account of complainant was remitted back in his account. The complainant has alleged that due to negligence of op bank, his 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 his cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. In this regard, complainant has 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 complainant 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 account of complainant on 31.7.2017 for insuring his crop of Kharif, 2017, the complainant personally visited the bank and declared that he is not interested in incurring expenditure on crop insurance premium and showed his grievance regarding transfer of amount for insurance of crop. Accordingly, premium amount deducted on 31.7.2017 was remitted back in his account on 2.8.2017 i.e. just within two days at the behest of complainant and as such his crop of Kharif, 2017 was not insured. In this regard, op bank has also placed on file declaration and undertakings given by complainant as Ex.R3.
8. Since, complainant himself visited the bank and has given in writing as per Ex.R3 that he does not want to get his crop insured from insurance company and undertook to repay the loan amount even in case his crop is damaged due to natural calamities or for any other reason, so now complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present complaint. The premium amount was deducted on 31.7.2017 for insurance of crop of complainant but as complainant raised objection for deduction of premium amount from his account, so same was returned back in his 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 complainant. So, complaint of the complainant deserves dismissal.
9. 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.
