<br /> By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:<br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.<br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint in brief is as follows.<br /> <br /> The Complainant cultivated plantain in .6 hector of land availing agricultural loan from the 1st Opposite party. When the loan was issued to the complainant certain amount in the way of premium was collected towards the insurance of the crop. As known to the Complainant and informed by the 1st Opposite Party if any damages effected or any untoward incidence happence insurance amount would be paid to the Complainant.<br /> <br /> 2. The plantain cultivation of the Complainant was lost in the severe drought and storm. The Opposite Party was informed of the destruction of the cultivation the agricultural officer inspected the plantain cultivation of the Complainant. The 1st Opposite Party also informed the Complainant subsequently the insured will be compensated adequately. The Complainant had the loss of near about Rs.1,00,000/- due to the drought and storm which resulted in destruction of the crop. When ever the Complainant enquired, the Opposite Party was not in a position to compensate paying the insurance amount. If an average crop was obtained the Complainant could have an income of Rs.1,00,000/-. The plantain cultivation was insured and the premium was collected by the Opposite party. The Opposite Party is not ready to give the Complainant Rs.1,00,000/- the risk covered under the policy.<br /> <br /> 3. The 1st Opposite Party filed version on their appearance. It is admitted that the Complainant approached the 1st Opposite Party for cultivating banana. A loan of Rs.75,000/- was sanctioned on 12.12.2003 on issuing loan to the Complainant the crop was insured as per the notification and direction of the State Level Co-ordination Committee on Crop Insurance (SLCCCI). The insurance of crop under this scheme is compulsory for all Loanee farmers. The guidelines and notification to the Opposite Party's bank is given by the Nodal Bank which is followed by the guidelines of General Insurance Corporation of India State Level Corp Insurance Cell TC 14/1765 Vazhuthacaud. The Opposite Party collected Rs. 462/- as the premium of the insurance. The insurance of the notified crops are to be insured within a period of time the demand draft drawn in favour of the Insurance Company along with the request of 5 other loanees were forward to the corporation on 15.1.2004. The Agricultural Insurance Corporation of India, formerly known as State Level Corporation Insurance Cell under the GIC of India <br /> assess the yield in district wise with their method. The claim of the aggrieved individual farmer is not taken in to consideration instead the loss of yield in crop is collectively looked in to and if aggrieved farmers found eligible the compensation are paid by the Insurance Corporation. The 1st Opposite Party has no knowledge on the issuance of compensation in individual basis. The application for compensation filed by the Complainant was forwarded to the NMGB head office Kannur. However the Insurer, the General Insurance Corporation of India is not impleaded as a party in this complaint. The complaint itself is bad for the non jointer of necessary parties. There is no latches on the part of the 1st Opposite Party. The coverage of the insurance in the banana cultivation is for a sum of Rs.35,000/-. The premium collected from the party is Rs.462/-. The complaint is not maintainable and it is to be dismissed with cost to the Opposite Party.<br /> <br /> 4. The 2nd Opposite Party filed version on their appearance. The sum up of the version is as given below. The premium collected from the Complainant for the insurance of the banana cultivation is admitted. The complaint is having the lacuna of non jointer of necessary parties. NMGB head Office Kannur (Nodal Bank) is to be a party to answer the claim of the Complainant. As propounded by the Central Government, the Government of Kerala accepted <br /> the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme which is absolutely a social welfare steps. The General Insurance Corporation of India was the agency now it is the Agricultural Insurance Company of India which is acting upon the scheme. The Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd (AICIL) is only an agent of Central Government in the administration aspect.<br /> <br /> 5. The scheme envisages to indemnify the loss of farmers in the cultivation of items specified as a result of drought heat etc. The purpose of the scheme is to promote the welfare of the farmers. The State Government notifies the crops, the unit of areas etc as decided by the State Level Co-ordination Committee for Crop Insurance (SLCCCI), the implementing agency of this scheme is Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd (AICIL). The financial institutions are informed by Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd (AICIL) regarding the procedures. The unit of area of insurance notified for banana crop under the scheme during Rabi-1 2003, 2004 season was a district. The collection of premium as well as the claims are done on seasonal basis. The coverage period prevailing in Kerala for notified banana crop under the scheme are kharif (autumn) 1st April to 31st July in Rabi-1 (winter) 1st October to 31st December of each year. The farmers who receive financial helps for the notified crops in the area where the scheme covers had to give the premium amount. The Commercial or Rural Bank which collect the premium from the farmers who are disbursed loan are to report it to their Nodal Bank Office. The respective Nodal Banks are to give a declaration to crop insurance cell of GIC of India for each notified area. The declarations are the detail of number of farmers insured, the area covered and the premium remitted etc. The 2nd Respondent has not received any detail regarding the name of farmers name of Villages or the name of bank branches where their loans are actually disbursed.<br /> <br /> 6. The scheme further envisage the yielding of the crops which is to be assessed by the departments of Economics and Statistics in hectare wise in an area. The threshold yield per<br /> hectare is 1st calculated all area wise, by calculating 90% of the average crop yield in the area for<br /> the preceding 3 years for paddy and wheat and 5 years average yield for other crops if any shortage effected in the threshold yield of a particular crop, the insured farmers growing that crop will be benefited and they are indemnified under the scheme. <br /> <br /> 7. The Petitioner has no locus standy to file the complaint against this Respondent. No service was rendered by the Respondent to the Petitioner and as a result the claim of the Complainant as a consumer is not sustainable. The 2nd Opposite Party is acting as an implementing agency of the Central Government for the administration of the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme. The premium collected from the Nodal Banks are holding in trust or deposit on behalf of the Central and State Government. The insurance cover given to the farmers is governed by the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme. The liability is not contractual on the basis of the service hired for consideration. The complainant does not detail sum insured and the notification of the district where in the banana is cultivated. The 2nd Respondent is not in a position to understand from the face of the Complainant whether the Complainant's banana cultivation is insured or not. The Nodal bank of the 1st Respondent's Bank confirmed that the Complainant's farmers banana crop had been insured during the Rabi-1 2003-2004 season for an amount of Rs.35,000/- in the Wayanad district the notified area. The threshold yield in kilograms per hectare is 12047, the actual yield in kilograms per hectare is 15429. There is no short fall in the actual yield in Rabi-1, 2003-2004 season in notified area of Wayanad for banana cultivation. Hence the claim is not payable. In this circumstances, the complaint is not maintainable and it is to be dismissed with cost to the 2nd Opposite Party. <br /> <br /> 8. The 3rd Opposite Party is supplemented and filed version on their appearance. The sum up of the version is as follows. The Government of Kerala approved the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) initiated by the Central Government. The General Insurance Corporation of India, State Level Crop Insurance Cell (SLCIC) which is at present known as <br /> Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd (AICIL) which acts an agent of Central government in administering the scheme. In the implementation of the scheme during the Rabi-1 and 2 of 2003-04 season in Kerala and the direction with respect to this were given to all the Nodal banks and other financial agencies.<br /> <br /> 9. National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) of insurance coverage is given to the Loanee farmers compulsory for seasonal agricultural operational loans from Nodal banks. The North Malabar Gramine Bank head office Kannur is one of the Nodal Bank. The 1st Opposite Party is the branch coming under the head office. The Complainant was given a loan of Rs.75,000/- out of which Rs.35,000/- was given for banana cultivation as per the direction in the scheme Rs. 462/- was collected from the Complainant as the insurance premium. The amount which collected from the loanee farmers as premium was sent to GIC by this Respondent through a demand draft along with declaration from Loanee farmers. The Respondent No.2 received premium. The request of the Complainant for the insured amount was in time intimated the GIC in reply to this the Respondent, the AIC informed that there is no system in the scheme to consider the individual claims of the borrowers. Further the Wayanad district is not considered as an area for the compensation of the particular cultivation in the absence of short fall in the yield of banana. There is no deficiency in service on the part of this Opposite Party, the complaint is to be dismissed with cost to this Opposite Party.<br /> <br /> 10. Points in consideration are:<br /> 1.Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?.<br /> 2.Relief and cost.<br /> <br /> 11. Point No.1:- The Complainant filed affidavit swearing the contention, Ext.A1 to A3 are marked by the Complainant in support of the allegations. The Opposite Party No.1 to 3 filed affidavit swearing their contentions. Ext.B1 to B21 are marked.<br /> <br /> 12. The case of the Complainant is that while availing loan from the 1st Opposite Party's Bank of Rs.75,000/-, Rs. 35,000/- was granted for the cultivation of banana. The Complainant is under the concept that the premium of the Insurance amount Rs. 462/- is collected from the Complainant towards the insurance of the crop. The banana cultivation was destroyed because of adverse climate as such strong wind and drought. According to the 1st Opposite Party the premium collected from the Loanee farmers were send to Nodal Bank who is arrayed as the <br /> (Cont........7)<br /> - 7 -<br /> 3rd Opposite party who sent the premium collected from the borrowers to GIC in demand draft along with declaration. The contention of the Opposite Party is that individual cases are not considered under the provisions of the scheme AIC is the implementing agency of the scheme. According to the 2nd Opposite Party the implementing agency of the scheme the amount collected in the way of premium is kept in their hold deposit and the coverage of insurance is given if any short fall effected in the area of cultivation. The short fall is assessed basing on the threshold yield for banana ( average of 5 years cultivation) with that of the running period the Rabi 1-2 of the 2003-2004. The unit of area for banana cultivation is district wise as per the notification of the state government in Wayanad district there is no short fall in the crop. The request of the Complainant was not considered on that ground. Ext.B13 is the order of the government implementing of the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme different committees are constituted including in the District Level Monitoring Committee for the implementations of the scheme. The Loanee farmers were compelled to give premium for the insurance of the crop. Ext.B14 the crop of the order of Government of India Ministry of Agricultural envisages the scheme and the method of risk covering. The scheme is intended to cover the non preventable <br /> risk such as natural fire, Lightning, Storm, Hailstorm, cyclone, Tornado. In short the natural calamities, pests and diseases in wider extent which amount short fall in the yield of crops are covered under the scheme and that too is in the unit area basing for banana a cultivation the entire district is the unit of area. <br /> <br /> 13. The 2nd Opposite Party who is examined as OPW2 deposed that the Loanee farmers are not connected directly with the insurance agency. As a whole the Complainant does not come under the purview of the consumer. An another contention of the Complainant is during that period Wayanad district declared by the Government of Kerala as the drought hit area which is admitted by the agricultural Officer who is examined as PW3. The implementation of the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) is followed by different committees. <br /> (Contd......8)<br /> - 8 -<br /> The threshold yield for banana in Rabi 1 2003 in Wayanad district was 12047 as per Ext.B20. The premium collected from the Complainant is Rs.462/- which was remitted and Ext.B18 is the statement of details of the payment made. The Opposite Parties are only the agencies in the implementation of the scheme. From the face of the documents produced and evidence rendered by the Opposite Party we are in the opinion that the purpose of the scheme cannot be implemented in the case of the Complainant. The statistical report on the crop of banana as per the documents produced also strengthen that the Complainant cannot be granted compensation for the destruction of the banana cultivation. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and the point No.1 is found accordingly.<br /> <br /> 14. Point No.2:- The detail discussion of the point No.2 is not necessary in this juncture regarding the cost and relief.<br /> <br /> In the result, the complaint is dismissed and no order upon cost. <br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced in open Forum on this the 28th day of August 2008.<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT: Sd/-<br /> <br /> MEMBER-I : Sd/-<br /> <br /> MEMBER-II: Sd/-<br /> /True Copy/<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.<br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> Witnesses for the Complainant:<br /> PW1. M.M. Thomas Complainant.<br /> PW2. C. Gunasekaran Agriculture Officer, Panamaram.<br /> PW3. V. Vijayan. Agriculture Officer.<br /> (Contd.....9)<br /> - 9 -<br /> Witnesses for the Opposite Parties:<br /> OPW1. Deena. Bank Manager, North Malabar Gramin Bank, Panamaram<br /> OPW2. Syam Kumar.B.G Administrative Officer, Agricultural Insurance Company of India.<br /> <br /> Exhibits for the Complainant:<br /> A1. Notice. dt:08.07.2005.<br /> A2. Copy of the Certificate. dt: 31.05.2004<br /> A3. Pass Book. <br /> <br /> Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:<br /> B1. Letter. dt:16.03.2004.<br /> B2.(2 sheet) Copy of the Application Form. <br /> B3. Copy of the Inspection Report for Crop Loans<br /> B4. (3 sheets) Copy of the Loan Agreement.<br /> B5 (14 sheets) True Copy of Guidelines and Notification dt: 29.09.2003.<br /> B6. Copy of the Details of Crop under NAIS<br /> B7. True copy of the Declaration Form. <br /> B8. True copy of the Loanee Declaration Acknowledgement. dt:10.09.3004.<br /> B9. True Copy of the Receipt. dt:21.01.2004.<br /> B10. True copy of the Letter. dt:27.03.2006.<br /> B11.(11 sheets)Govt. of India, Ministry of Agriculture Letter <br /> No. 13011/15/99- Credit II. dt:16.07.1999.<br /> <br /> B12. Loans on Security Ledger. dt:21.11.2007.<br /> B13. Copy of the Govt. of Kerala Order No.G.O (MS) No.304/99/AD. dt:27.10.1999.<br /> B14.(13 pages) Govt. of India, Ministry of Agriculture Letter <br /> No. 13011/15/99- Credit II. dt:16.07.1999.<br /> <br /> B15.(19 sheets)Copy of the Govt. of Kerala Order No.G.O (Rt) <br /> No.1491/2003/AD. dt:30.10.2003.<br /> <br /> (Contd......10)<br /> - 10 -<br /> <br /> B16. Copy of the Declaration Form for Loanee Farmers. <br /> B17. Copy of the Declaration form for Loanee Farmers. dt:15.01.2004.<br /> B18. Copy of the Details of Crop under NAIS <br /> B19. Copy of the Letter. dt:25.05.2006.<br /> B20. Copy of the Threshold yield of Banana Wayanad District<br /> during Rabi-I 2003-04 Season.<br /> <br /> A21. Letter of Authorization <br />