BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 441 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 07.08.2019.
Date of Decision : 04.10.2022.
1. Balbir Singh, aged about 54 years, son of Shri Madan Singh,
2. Jyoti Khod, aged about 30 years, daughter of Balbir Singh, both residents of village Bhuratwala, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa. Mobile No. 80530-70777.
Versus.
1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. 4th Floor, the Statement Building Plot No.149, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Next to Hometel Hotel, Chandigarh - 160002 through its Manager.
2. HDFC Bank, Branch village Panniwala Mota, Tehsil and District Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (as amended under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019).
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR……………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………….………………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Ved Parkash, Advocate for complainants.
Sh. R.K. Mehta, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainants have filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of complainants is that they are agriculturists having land in joint share (as detailed in para no.1 of complaint) situated in village Bhuratwala, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa as per jamabandi for year 2016-2017. They are having their joint account with op no.2 bearing no. 50200017588080. On 31.7.2017, the op no.2 bank deducted premium amount of Rs.22,176.60 from account of complainants for insuring their crop of Kharif, 2017 with op no.1 under Prime Minister Fasal Bima Yojna. That cotton crop of complainants sown by them in Kharif, 2017 in about 44 acres of land was damaged due to disaster of white bees and other natural calamities and they are entitled to insurance amount of Rs.13,20,000/- approximately at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per acre. However, later on complainant came to know that said amount of Rs.22,176.60 has been credited in their account on 11.8.2017 without their consent. The complainants enquired about the matter from ops but no satisfactory reply was given by ops and complainants have been deprived of from insurance claim without any cause. The complainants approached the ops and requested to release the insurance claim but in all vain and ops have caused unnecessary harassment and mental agony to them. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed reply raising certain preliminary objections regarding no coverage of alleged loss, insurance company cannot be quested for proposal related disputes, not maintainable for want of jurisdiction, non submission of proof of loss or weather report, limited coverage as per scheme, yield basis claims are decided by Government, no survey no quantification of loss, no privity of contract, non impleading of necessary parties etc. It is also submitted that if any mistake is done by complainants or by bank of complainants, insurance company cannot be held liable for claim amount. On merits, the contents of complaint are denied. It is submitted that claim of complainants was rejected as crop loss occurred due to rains but the same is not leading to Inundation which is covered for loss under the scheme and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. Op no.2 filed reply submitting therein that detail regarding some accounts could not be uploaded on the portal of insurance company due to non availability of adhar card and the amount debited in their account was not remitted to the insurance company. The complainants are estopped by their own act and conduct to file the present complaint against answering op. In fact, at the time of sanction of loan, the complainants 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 crop loan alongwith interest even if the crops are failed due to natural calamities or for any other reasons”. On receipt of message of debiting of amount, complainants alongwith office bearer of Kisan Union visited the bank premises on 11.08.2017 and shown their grievance regarding transfer of amount for insurance of crops as they had not authorized the bank to get their crop insured. They were advised to deposit the adhar card with the bank as insurance was necessary on the instructions from Govt. of India, but they refused to get the crop insured, as such the premium amount was remitted bank in the account of complainants. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.2 made.
5. The complainants have tendered affidavit of Balbir Singh complainant Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4.
6. On the other hand, Op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Sourabh Mehta, Assistant Manager as Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex. R1 and Ex.R2.
7. Op no.1 did not lead any evidence despite availing several opportunities.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
9. The complainants have claimed insurance claim amount for the damage of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. However, the op no.2 bank has taken a specific stand that though insurance premium amount of Rs.22,176.60 was deducted from the account of complainants on 31.7.2017 for insuring their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 with op no.1 but as complainants raised objection regarding deduction of premium amount from their account, therefore, at their instance the premium amount was reversed back in their account and their crop was not insured. The perusal of copy of statement of account of complainants Ex.C2 and Ex.R1 also reveal that premium amount of Rs.22,176.60 which was deducted from the account of complainants on 31.07.2017 was reversed back in their account on 11.8.2017 i.e. within ten days of its deduction. Since the premium amount was remitted back in the account of complainants at their own instance as complainants objected for deduction of the same and stated that insurance of crop is not required, therefore, now complainants are estopped from filing the present complaint by their own act and conduct.
10. 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 President,
Dated: 04.10.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
