BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.              

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 309 of 2019                                                                     

                                                             Date of Institution :    10.06.2019.

                                                          Date of Decision   :    09.03.2022.

Mahavir Parsad aged about 46 years son of Shri Bhiya Ram, resident of village Ganga Dhani Prempura, 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 complainants.

                   Sh. M.S. Sethi, 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 94 kanals 7 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 50200010886582. 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.7534.80 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 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.7534.40 was debited on 31.7.2017 from the account of complainant 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 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 13.5 acre. He also asked that insurance is not required for the crop of Guar, hence insurance premium debited in account on 31.7.2017 was again credited in account of complainant on 11.8.2017 (actually 2.8.2017) and in this way, Kharif crop of complainant 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 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, copies of khasra girdawaris Ex.C6, Ex.C7, copy of statement of account Ex.C8, copies of jamabandis Ex.C9 top Ex.C15 and copy of adhar card Ex.C11.

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 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.R3 reveals that on 31.7.2017, premium amount of Rs.7534.80 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.7534.80 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 will sow Guar crop in Kharif, 2017 and there is no need for insurance of his Guar crop and as such premium amount was remitted back in his account just within two days i.e. on 2.8.2017 and as such his crop of Kharif, 2017 was not insured. In this regard, op bank has also placed on file writing/letter of complainant wherein it is mentioned that he will sow Guar crop in Kharif, 2017.

7.                Since, complainant himself visited the bank and has given in writing as per Ex.R2 that he 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 complainant by the bank after two days, now complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present complaint. Further, as complainant himself has shown willingness in writing to sow crop of Guar instead of crops which are covered under insurance scheme, therefore, khasra girdawaris are not helpful to the complainant. 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.

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.