BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 345 of 2019
Date of Institution : 01.07.2019
Date of Decision : 05.03.2021.
Surender son of Ram Murti, aged about 47 years, resident of village Gigorani, Tehsil N.S. Chopata and District Sirsa (HR).
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Oriental General Insurance Company Limited, Oriental House, A-25/27 Asaf Road New Delhi Pin 110002.
2. HDFC Bank Limited through its Manager, Branch SRB Building Janta Bhawan Road JPO Sirsa, District Sirsa (HR).
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. RAGHBIR SINGH………………PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……..…… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Anil Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. K.L. Gagneja, Advocate for opposite party no.1.
Sh. M.S.Sethi, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainant has 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.
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that he is farmer by profession and is Kisan Credit Card holder in HDFC Bank vide account No. 50200004157738. That complainant is owner in possession of agricultural lands situated in villages Gigorani and village Jasnia as detailed in Para No. 2(i) and 2 (ii) of the complaint. It is further averred that as per notification of Government of India, all the Kisan Credit Card account holders are required to get their crop insured through their respective banker where they are maintaining KCC account and accordingly op no.2 deducted premium of Rs.8395.20 on 31.7.2018 from the KCC account of complainant on account of premium for insurance of cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. In this way, complainant got insured the cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 with op no.1 through op no.2. It is further averred that premium was deducted by op no.2 from his account on the cutoff date of the deposition of premium and when complainant confirmed from op no.2 regarding insurance premium, he was told that their premium has been deposited with op no.1. That cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2018 season was damaged and other farmers of village Gigorani and village Jasania have received insurance claim at the rate of Rs.17,350/- per acre but the complainant only received Rs.20,000/- as insurance claim and he was assured that remaining amount of insurance claim will be deposited in his account very soon. It is further averred that thereafter complainant again visited the ops in this regard but till now he has not received the remaining amount of claim amount and the ops have caused harassment and deficiency in service towards him. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Opposite party no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections and also clarified about objective of the scheme. In the written statement, it has been clarified that except localized claims, all other perils were to be finalized by government agencies on the basis of yield of crop and thereafter, claims were to be paid to bank of farmers. The insurance company is playing a role of implementing agency in the scheme in accordance with guidelines prescribed by Government. Further more, in localized claims, three perils are covered under the scheme i.e. Hailstorm, Landslide and Inundation affecting isolated farms in the notified area. For localized claims, there was a condition for immediate intimation of claim within 48 hours of loss. After intimation of claim, necessary survey of affected area had to be conducted by surveyor for decision of claim of farmers. It is further submitted that it is not an individual insurance policy like other insurance policies rather it is a group insurance scheme in accordance with agreed terms and conditions of scheme which are binding on all of concerned related to the scheme. The complainant should have approached to DAC & FW department for any kind of grievance related to scheme or claim and the decision of said department would be binding on all state Government/ Insurance Company/ Bank and farmers. But instead of filing complaint or grievance before DAC & FW department, the complainant has approached this Forum by violating standard terms and conditions of scheme and thus, present complaint cannot be adjudicated before this Forum. It is further submitted that complainant never intimated any claim to insurance company for loss of crop and thus, concocted story of claim of complainant cannot be believed in absence of credible evidence of loss of crop and proof of timely intimation of claim. Merely allegation of claim intimation is not enough to establish that loss had actually occurred. Further, in absence of immediate intimation of claim, survey of damage field could not be conducted and therefore, it is almost impossible to determine quantification of loss. As per guidelines of scheme, immediate intimation was to be given within 48 hours but complainant has failed to give any claim intimation to company for loss of crop which reveals violation of terms and conditions of scheme. Other preliminary objections regarding 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 and involvement of complicated facts and law are also involved also taken. On merits, it is submitted that every farmer who wants to get the benefits of KCC, then he should have compulsorily get the insurance under the scheme of Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, rest of the contents of complaint are denied, because no intimation ever received by op from any authorized agency or bank. It is further submitted that no crop in the lands of complainant situated in village Gigorani was insured with the answering op and no premium for crop of complainant of village Gigorani was ever remitted to the answering op. However, only the premium for crop in the land of complainant situated in village Jasania was remitted to the answering op. It is further submitted that claim for damage to the crop had been paid as per the loss assessment sheet to the farmers of village Gigorani and village Jasania, whose crops were insured with the answering op. The complainant was paid an amount of Rs.20,497/- as claim for loss of crop in the land situated in village Jasania. No amount whatsoever is pending towards the answering op. Remaining contents of the complaint are also denied to be wrong and dismissal of complaint prayed for.
4. Opposite party no.2 filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, no cause of action, no consumer dispute, concealment of material facts etc. On merits, the paras no.1 to 3 and 5 of the complaint have been admitted. In reply to para no.6 of the complaint, it is submitted that crops of the complainant have been got insured from op no.1 which has received premium for insurance of crops of complainant for kharif, 2018. It is further submitted that as per clause 19(XXII) of Haryana Govt. Agriculture and Farmer Welfare Department Notification No. 941-Agri-II(I)-2018/4332 dated 30.3.2018, “The Insurance Company shall verify the data of insured farmers pertaining to area insured, area sown, address, bank account number (KYC) as provided by the banks independently on its own cost within two months of the cutoff date and in case of any correction must report to the State Govt. failing which no objection by the Insurance Company at a later stage will be entertained and it will be binding on the Insurance Company to pay the claim”. In the present case insurance company has accepted the premium without any objection and has never refunded the same. In this case it is presumed that insurance company has insured the crops of complainant after accepting the premium. It is further submitted that complainant never visited the answering op regarding insurance claim. Moreover, matter regarding payment of compensation is between complainant and op no.1. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.2 made.
5. The parties then led their respective evidence.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
7. The complainant in order to prove his complaint 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 record copy of statement of account Ex.C1, copy of adhar card Ex.C2, copy of jamabandi of village Gigorani for the year 2011-2012 Ex.C3, copy of jamabandi of village Jasania for the year 2012-2013 Ex.C4, copy of detail of complainant having crop name, area, village names, account number etc. furnished by Bank Ex.C5, copy of statement of account of one Satpal Ex.C6, report of Assistant Statistical Officer office of DDA Sirsa Ex.C7, copy of notification of Haryana Government Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department dated 30.3.2018 Ex.C8 and copy of message received from bank Ex.C9. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. S.K. Malhotra, Divisional Manager as Ex.R1. OP no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Mehta, Assistant Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R2 and copy of statement of account Ex.R3 and copy of details of farmers whose crops were insured as Ex.R4.
8. According to the complainant, he owns agricultural lands in two villages i.e. Gigorani and Jasania and has placed on record copy of jamabandi Ex.C3 showing agricultural land in village Gigorani and copy of jamabandi Ex.C4 showing agricultural land in village Jasania. It is proved on record that complainant is holding KCC account with op no.2. It is also proved on record from the copy of statement of account Ex.C1 that on 31.7.2018, an amount of Rs.8395.20 was deducted from his account by op no.2 bank and said amount was credited in the account of op no.1 insurance company for insuring the cotton crop of the complainant for the kharif, 2018. According to the complainant, he is holding agricultural lands in two villages i.e. Gigorani and Jasania and crops of both the villages were insured with op no.1 and he has received part payment of Rs.20,000/- as insurance claim for the damage to his crop situated in the agricultural land of village Jasania whereas he is also entitled to remaining claim amount for the damage of his crop in this village Jasania and is also entitled to full claim amount for the damage of his crop in village Gigorani as other farmers of both these villages have already received insurance claim against the damage of cotton crop for Kharif, 2018 season at the rate of Rs.17,350/- per acre. In order to prove the plea that crops of his two villages were got insured by the bank from op no.1, the complainant has placed on record a document of the Bank in which all the particulars of the complainant specially area of land as 14.40 acres, villages Gigorani and Jasania, name of the cotton crop for the season 2018-2019 with account number are mentioned which shows that complainant was given this document (Ex.C5) by the op bank intimating him that cotton crops of his agricultural land measuring 14.40 acres situated in villages Gigorani and Jasania for the kharif, 2018 are being insured with the insurance company op no.1. So, it is proved on record that op no.2 bank had deducted premium amount of Rs.8395.20 for insuring cotton crops of agricultural lands of both the above said villages of the complainant for the kharif, 2018 with the op no.1 insurance company. In so far as damage to the cotton crops of the complainant in both the villages is concerned, the complainant has placed on file report of the Assistant Statistical Officer, office of Agriculture Department, Sirsa as Ex.C7 according to which threshold yield of Block Nathusari Chopta for kharif, 2018 is 561.06 Kg. Lint. per Hectare and average yield of village Gigorani for Kharif, 2018 is 229.43 Kg. Lint per Hectare and average yield of village Jasania for Kharif, 2018 is 533.66 Kg. Lint per hectare. The complainant has also placed on file copy of notification of Haryana Government Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department dated 30.3.2018 which has come into existence for implementation of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) in the State during Kharif 2018 and Rabi 2018-19 and as per Clause 15(b) of said notification of Haryana Government “shortfall in yield will be calculated by comparing the threshold yield with the actual yield estimated through crop cutting experiments (CCEs).” Since as per report of Assistant Statistical Officer of Agriculture Department, the average yield of village Gigorani and Jasania (Block Nathusari Chopta) for kharif, 2018 is less than threshold yield of Block Nathusari Chopta for kharif, 2018, so according to above said criteria given in clause 15(b) of the notification, there was damage to the cotton crops of village Gigorani and Jasania for kharif, 2018 and as such other farmers of those village received insurance claim amount for damage to their crops. Therefore, it is proved on record that there was loss to the cotton crops of complainant in his above said both villages.
9. Now we see whether op no.1 insurance company, op no.2 bank or both the ops are liable to pay insurance claim for damages to the crops of complainant in villages Gigorani and Jasania. The complainant has placed on record copy of a text message sent by op no.2 bank to his mobile on 8.8.2018 as Ex.C9 in which it is mentioned that “Dear Customer, Crop insurance premium of Rs.8395.2 has been debited on 31-Jul-2017 (though wrongly mentioned as 31 July 2017 and it should be 31.7.2018) for Kharif 2018 for crop cotton on land measuring 14.4 acres located in District Sirsa, Tehsil Sirsa, Village Jasania (9), Gram Panchayat- Jassania in Haryana.” So, as per this message sent on 8.8.2018, only cotton crop of the land of village Jasania of the complainant for the kharif, 2018 was got insured and there is no mention of insurance of crop of the village Gigorani. Here we see fault on the part of op no.2 bank as vide document Ex.C5 the bank intimated the complainant that his cotton crops in the area of 14.40 acres in village Gigorani and Jasania are being got insured but on 8.8.2018 by sending message on telephone the bank informed that complainant that his cotton crop in village Jasania has been insured but the area of this village Jasania has been showing same as 14.4 acres and this is also lapse on the part of the op no.2 bank as complainant is holding agricultural land measuring 14.4 acres in above said two villages i.e. Gigorani and Jasania and not in only one village Jasania and premium of Rs.8395.20 has also been received from the complainant for insuring crops of his two villages. Though complainant is holding 14.4 acres of agricultural land in two villages but he has been shown holding 14.4 acres of land in village Jasania only and then op no.1 insurance company in its detail of insured farmers as Ex.R5 has also shown that crop of complainant in village Jasania has been insured and he has been shown at Sr. No.12 in this detail. The opposite party no.1 has also not verified the data of the insured complainant regarding his land in two villages. As per clause 19 (XXII) of Haryana Govt. Agriculture and Farmer Welfare Department Notification No. 941-Agri-II (I)-2018/4332 dated 30.3.2018, the insurance company op no.1 was to verify the data of insured farmers pertaining to area insured, area sown, address, bank account number etc. as provided by the banks independently on its own cost within two months of the cut off date but op no.1 has also failed to do so. But when the premium amount of Rs.8395.20 has been received by op no.1 through op no.2 for insuring crops of 14.4 acres we are of the considered view that complainant is entitled to insurance claim amount for the damage of his cotton crops of 14.4 acres in agricultural land of his two villages Gigorani and Jasania. Since op no.1 has not verified the fact of his land in two villages, we are of the view that insurance company is liable to pay the claim amount for the damage of his crops in two villages and the bank is liable to compensate him for harassment.
10. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint against both the opposite parties. We direct the opposite party no.1 insurance company to settle and pay the claim of the complainant for the damage of his cotton crops in villages Gigorani and Jasania for Kharif, 2018 at par with other farmers of those villages who have received claim amount for the damage of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 and op no.1 will also adjust the amount of Rs.20,497/- in the payable claim amount which has already been paid to the complainant for loss of crop in village Jasania. We direct the opposite party no.2 bank to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Both the ops are liable to comply with this order within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which their respective payable amounts will carry interest @7% per annum from the date of this order till actual realization. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:05.03.2021. Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa
