BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 413 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 02.08.2019.
Date of Decision : 15.09.2022.
Sukhraj Singh aged about 58 years son of Shri Hakam Sigh son of Shri Lal Singh, resident of village Jalalana, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Punjab National Bank, Chormar Khera, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa, through its Branch Manager.
2. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa, through its Divisional 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.
SH. SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. P.K. Berwal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. K.L. Gagneja, 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 (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is an agriculturist having 1/4th share of mortgaged land comprised in Sq No. 39 Killa No.21 Sq No. 40 Killa No.24 and 25, Sq. No.60 Killa No. 3/2/2, 4, 5, 6/2, 7, 8/1, 13/2, 14, 15, 16, 17/1, 17/2, 18/1, 23/1/2 Min, 24, 25, Sq. No.61 Killa No.1, 10/1, 10/2, 11, 20 and 21 Sq. No. 63 Killa No. 2/2, 3/2, 4/1, 4/2, 7/1, 8 and 9 situated at village Chormarkhera, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa as per copy of jamabandi for the year 2016-2017. The complainant has availed KCC facility from op no.1 vide his account bearing no. 1030008800011996 after mortgaging his above said share of the land. That on 31.07.2018, op no.1 deducted premium amount of Rs.2913.74 from the account of complainant for insurance of his crop of Kharif, 2018 under Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna. The op no.1 got insured the crop of Kharif, 2018 from op no.2 but no insurance policy was provided to the complainant despite his request. It is further averred that complainant sown cotton crop in Kharif, 2018 but in his village the cotton crop was destroyed/ damaged on account of natural calamities, pests. Diseases including crop of complainant. The complainant approached the ops and requested for payment of claim amount but ops asked him to wait for some time. Meanwhile, op no.1 again deducted premium in the month of December, 2018 for insurance of his crop of Rabi 2018-2019. That even passing of sufficient time, complainant did not get claim for damage of his crop of Kharif, 2018 whereas some of the villagers/ farmers have already received claim amount. The agriculture work is only source of livelihood of complainant. It is further averred that complainant again approached the ops and requested them to compensate him but the ops about a week ago flatly refused to admit his genuine claim. The complainant is entitled to claim amount of Rs.1,32,000/- at the rate of Rs.22,000/- per acre alongwith compensation for harassment and litigation expenses. Hence, this complainant.
3. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Op no.1 filed written version raising preliminary objections that as per the term of Prime Minister Fasal Bima Yojna (PMFBY), which was launched by Hon’ble Prime Minister of India on 13.02.2016, for the farmers who have sought crop loan by any Financial Institutions, it was mandatory for the banks to insure all the borrowers under the scheme. The premium of insurance was to be deducted from the account of the borrower and was to be remitted to op no.2 insurance company the bank. In the present case, the bank has debited the premium amount from the account of complainant for insurance of crop of Kharif, 2018. As per clause 6.3.1 of revised operational guidelines of PMFBY, the Aadhar had been made mandatory for availing crop insurance from Kharif 2017 season onward. The information regarding the insurance could not be uploaded in the portal of the company op no.2 for want of adhar card, as such, the premium amount was remitted back in the account of complainant. It is further submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of answering op. Mere sanctioning/ disbursement of crop loan and submission of proposals/ declarations and remittance of premium by farmer/ bank, without explicit intent to raise the crop, does not constitute acceptance of risk by insurance company. On merits, the pleas taken in the preliminary objections are reiterated, contents of complaint are denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. Op no.2 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction, non intimation, non submission of proof of loss or weather report, limited coverage as per scheme, yield basis claims are decided by the Government, no survey no quantification of lass, no privity of contract, non impleading of necessary parties etc. On merits, it is submitted that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and answering op. 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 concerned related to the scheme and all the necessary information and required documents may be collected by any Govt. agency/ Bank/ Insurance portal etc. and supplied to the concerned insurance company. It is further submitted that had the premium been deducted from the account of complainant, his crop would have been insured and his account particulars for the purpose of insurance would have been uploaded on the National Crop Insurance Portal of PMFBY by the Nodal Bank. But his account particulars are not uploaded on the portal. Thus, the crop of complainant was not insured with the answering op. It is further submitted that no premium for crop of complainant of village Jalalana was ever remitted to the answering op. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. Complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex. C1 and copies of documents i.e. statement of account Ex.C2, jamabandi for the year 2016-2017 Ex.C3, statement of account Ex.C4, detail provided by bank Ex.C5, khasra girdawari Ex.C6, affidavit of Sh. Harmander Singh son of Sukhraj Singh Ex. C7, statement of account of Sh. Harmander Singh Ex.C8, adhar card of Sh. Harmander Singh Ex.C9, affidavit of Sh. Harpreet Singh son of Sh. Gurjant Singh Ex.C10, statement of account of Sh. Harpreet Singh Ex. C11 and adhar card of Sh. Harpreet Singh Ex. C12.
6. On the other hand, op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Virender Kumar, Sr. Divisional Manager as Ex.R1 and copies of documents. i.e. clauses of operational guidelines of PMFBY Ex.R2 to Ex.R6, minutes of the 4th meeting of State Level Grievance Committee Ex.R7.
7. Op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Kirpal Singh, Branch Manager as Ex.R8, copy of account ledger inquiry Ex.R9.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
9. The grievance of the complainant is that he did not receive insurance claim amount for the damage of his insured cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 despite the fact that op no.1 bank deducted premium amount of Rs.2913.74 from the account of complainant on 31.07.2018 for insuring his cotton crop of Kharif, 201 with op no.2. The complainant has further alleged that other farmers of village Chormarkhera, District Sirsa have already received insurance claim for the damage of their cotton crop of kharif, 2018 but complainant has not received any claim amount from any of the opposite parties and complainant is entitled to claim amount of Rs.1,32,000/- at the rate of Rs.22,000/- per acre. The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit Ex.C1 in which he has reiterated the contents of his complaint. He has also placed on file copy of statement of his account Ex.C2, the perusal of which reveals that on 31.07.2018, an amount of Rs. 2913.74 was debited from his account for insurance of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. The said statement of account Ex.C2 also reveals that on 27.06.2019, the above said premium amount of Rs.2913.74 was reversed in the account of complainant. It is the specific stand of op no.2 insurance company that since it did not receive any premium amount for insurance of cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2018, so insurance company is not liable to pay any claim amount to the complainant. In so far as damage to the cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2018 is concerned, the complainant has alleged that there was damage of cotton crop in his village Chamarkhera including crop of complainant and other farmers have already received claim amount for the damage of their cotton crop. In this regard, Harmandar Singh son of complainant and Harpreet Singh son of Gurjant Singh nephew of complainant have tendered their affidavits Ex.C7 and Ex.C10 respectively and have stated that they have received claim amount for the damage of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 on 3.5.2019. Complainant has also placed on file copy of statement of account of said Harmander Singh as Ex.C8, the perusal of which reveals that said Harmander Singh received claim amount of Rs. 33,365.62 for the damage of his crop of Kharif, 2018. From the copy of statement of account of above said Harpreet Singh placed on file by complainant as Ex.C11, it is evident that said Harpreet Singh also received claim amount of Rs.66,698.27 on 3.5.2019 for the damage of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. Further more, there is also report of Agriculture Department, Sirsa on file according to which the average yield of village Chormarkhera of Kharif, 2018 was 326.68 Kgs. lint. per hectare and threshold yield of block Odhan of Kharif, 2018 was 602.64 Kgs. lint. per hectare. So, as per this report as well as in view of the fact that other co-sharers of complainant have already received claim amount, it is also proved on record that there was also loss to the crop of complainant in Kharif, 2018. It is also proved on record that though premium amount was deducted from the account of complainant for insurance of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 but same was not paid to op no.2 insurance company. The reason put forth by op no.1 bank for non remittance of premium amount to op no.2 is that information regarding insurance could not be uploaded in the portal of company op no.2 for want of adhar card, as such the premium amount was remitted back in the account of complainant. However, op no.1 bank has not proved on record that ever op no.1 bank demanded adhar card of complainant but complainant did not supply the same. When the information of insurance was not being uploaded on the portal of insurance company op no.2 for want of adhar card, the op no.1 was required to obtain adhar card from complainant but op no.1 has failed to do so and therefore, crop of complainant could not be insured due to fault and lapses on the part of op no.1 bank. The op no.1 bank has not explained the reason of refund of premium after such a long delay of about one year. The premium amount which was debited from the account of complainant on 31.07.2018 was refunded back in his account by op no.1 bank on 27.6.2019 i.e. after almost one year. The op no.1 bank has not placed on file any copy of letter written to the complainant demanding his adhar card. Neither op no.1 bank demanded adhar card from complainant nor refunded back the premium amount to him in time and therefore, complainant could not get insurance claim for the damage of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 due to negligence of op no.1 bank and therefore, op no.1 bank has caused deficiency in service towards the complainant. As such, op no.1 bank is liable to pay the claim amount for the damage of cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2018.
10. Now, the question arises as to what amount the complainant is entitled for from op no.1 bank? Admittedly, the premium amount of Rs.2913.74 was deducted by op no.1 bank for insuring cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. Similarly, premium amount of Rs.2913.74 was also deducted for insuring crop of Harpreet Singh son of Gurjant Singh who is nephew of complainant and said Harpreet Singh has received claim amount of Rs.66,698.27 for the damage of his crop. Since equal premium amount of Rs.2913.74 was deducted from account of complainant and said Harpreet Singh for equal land, the complainant is also entitled to the claim amount of Rs.66,698.27 from op no.1 bank. However, no liability of op no.2 insurance company of any kind is made out.
11. Keeping in view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party no.1 bank to pay above said amount of Rs.66,698.27 (in round figure Rs.66,700) to the complainant alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 2.8.2019 till actual realization within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order as other co-sharers of complainant have already received claim amount on 3.5.2019. We also direct the op no.1 bank to further pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as composite compensation for harassment including litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. However, complaint qua op no.2 insurance company stands dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 15.09.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
