BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 372 of 2019
Date of Institution : 16.07.2019.
Date of Decision : 18.02.2020.
Ved Pal aged about 48 years son of Shri Ramji Lal son of Shri Jot Ram, resident of village Neziakhera, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Punjab National Bank village Darba Kalan, Branch District Sirsa, through its Branch Manager.
2. Chief Lead District Manager, Punjab National Bank, Rori Bazar, Main Branch, Sirsa, District Sirsa.
3. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., City Thana Road, Sirsa, through its Branch Manager.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. K.S. Gill, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite parties no.1 and 2.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.3.
ORDER
The case of complainant, in brief, is that complainant is an agriculturist having land measuring 24 kanal 3 marlas being 1/6 share of 1293/2249 share of total land measuring 252 kanal 5 marlas comprised in Khewat No.14 situated in village Neziakhera, District Sirsa. The complainant has obtained crop loan under KCC limit from op no.1 to the extent of Rs.1,25,000/- vide rapat no.815 dated 15.6.2012 vide KCC account No. 1350008802015562. The complainant is maintaining the above said account regularly without any fault on his part. It is further averred that from the above said bank account of complainant, a sum of Rs.1762.50 was deducted as insurance premium for cotton crop of kharif, 2018. The above said crop was damaged due to natural calamities and an amount of Rs.9943.96 was deposited in the above said account of complainant as compensation for kharif, 2018 for village Makhoshoran, whereas land of complainant is situated in village Neziakhera, District Sirsa. That this compensation amount is so less because Chhotu Ram, Madan Lal, Ram Swaroop brothers of complainant also obtained loan from SBI ADB Branch, Sirsa with regards to land equivalent of the complainant and Rs.1749/- as insurance premium was deducted from their accounts on 30.7.2018 and they have been given compensation approximately Rs.70,000/- each. That thereafter complainant made an enquiry regarding less compensation but op no.1 did not give any satisfactory reply. Then complainant visited op no.2 through LDM Arun Soni and enquired the matter who told that his land has been shown in village Makhoshoran, Tehsil Nathusari Chopta whereas complainant is having no landed property in village Makhoshoran and he has been given a writing to this effect on 22.5.2019 stating that due to clerical mistake during updating the insurance detail of Prime Minister Fasal Beema Yojna portal Makhoshoran village entered instead of Neziakhera. This is negligence on the part of ops and complainant is not at fault in any manner and complainant is legally entitled for compensation of Rs.70,000/-. That complainant approached and requested the ops to admit his claim and even legal notice dated 31.5.2019/ 3.6.2019 was also served upon ops but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Ops no.1 and 2 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant has mortgaged land measuring 10 Kanal 15 Marla being 480/5011 share of land measuring 112 Kanal 9 Marla situated in village Nezia Khera, Tehsil and District Sirsa vide jamabandi for the year 2006-2007 and it is wrong to say that complainant has mortgaged land measuring 24 kanal 3 marlas rather complainant has availed financial assistance against the land measuring 10 kanal 15 marlas in shape of KCC limit. He has mortgaged said land with answering op as security vide mortgage deed no. 993 dated 15.6.2012 duly registered in the office of Sub Registrar, Nathusari Chopta and TSC rapat no.815 dated 15.6.2012. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.1762.50 was debited in the account of complainant as crop insurance premium for op no.3 to insure the crops of complainant of 10 kanal 15 marla and premium was deposited to op no.3. 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 date 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 cut off 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 claim. The brothers of complainant may have mortgaged land more than him, hence they have get more compensation then complainant. Moreover, insurance company op no.3 has accepted the premium for insurance of crop of complainant and they are liable to pay compensation to the complainant and if insurance company has not insured the crop of complainant then they have to refund the amount. It is further submitted that a meeting was called by Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa on 17.7.2019 in which officials of Agriculture Department and officials of all the insurance companies including op no.3 came present in said meeting and it was resolved that even if the name of village has been mentioned wrongly even then farmer who have paid insurance premium are entitled for insurance claim. It is further submitted that Deputy Director Agriculture and Farmer Welfare Department Sirsa issued a letter No.11801 dated 6.8.2019 to op no.3 to make the payment of compensation to said farmers and list of farmers whose village name has been wrongly mentioned in portal has also been supplied to op no.3 through said letter. It was the duty of insurance company to visit the spot before acceptance of premium. With these averments, dismissal of complaint qua ops no.1 and 2 prayed for.
3. Op no.3 filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable on the ground of privity of contract as insurance scheme has been provided to bank and consideration for the services of insurance, if any is also to be received from bank only and that it is the duty of banker of loanee farmer to ensure correct particulars to be uploaded in all respect as bank is paid 4% charges on account of service charges on the premium collected from bank. That present complaint is without any cause of action against answering op as banker has uploaded the village as Makhosaran and yield loss as assessed by competent authority for the village uploaded on the part by banker has been paid by answering op and that complaint is pre-mature as there is specific Grievance Redressal Mechanism as per clause of operational guidelines of scheme. On merits, it is submitted that entire data portal record uploaded by banker of complainant was checked by the insurance company and it has been found that complainant has been paid the loss to the crop shown to be situated and standing at the time of insurance coverage in village Makhosaran by his banker and according to the report of Competent Authority about the loss, this very sum of Rs.9943/- has been calculated and paid to the complainant. The answering op cannot go and pay beyond the data received uploaded by the bank while getting the insurance coverage about the particular farmer, as contract of insurance is based upon principle of utmost good faith, hence coverage was given accordingly as per data reported/ uploaded by the bank. There was an option available with the bank to get the mistake corrected within stipulated period, if any occurred at the time of uploading the data, but particular of village Makhosaran for the crop insurance coverage remained same. There is no technical, clerical or otherwise any mistake or fault on the part of answering op or its officials. The loss of crop is to be paid by answering op after receipt of loss of assessment after comparing the entire date record with the portal record by way of cross checking the same and in case of any wrong particulars about name of crop or insured or village etc and payment is made according to the portal data record, considering which the insurance coverage was given by the insurance company. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.
4. The parties then led their respective evidence.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully.
6. The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has deposed and reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. He has also furnished copy of jamabandi Ex.C1, detail of crop etc. Ex.C2, certificate of bank Ex.C3, copies of pass books Ex.C4 to Ex.C7, copy of legal notice Ex.C8, postal receipt Ex.C9 and adhar card Ex.C10. On the other hand, op no.3 has furnished affidavit of Sh. S.K. Malhotra, Divisional Manager as Ex.R1, copy of operational guidelines Ex.R2. Ops no.1 and 2 produced affidavit of Sh. Ravi Kumar, Branch Manager & Principal Officer as Ex.R3, copy of reply to legal notice Ex.R4, postal receipt Ex.R5, copy of letter Ex.R6, copy of minutes of meeting Ex.R7, copy of letter dated 6.8.2019 Ex.R8, copy of notification Ex.R9, copy of statement of account Ex.R10 and copy of letter/list Ex.R11.
7. It is proved on record that complainant is owner of land measuring 24 Kanal 3 Marlas as detailed in para no.1 of the complaint. As per allegations of complainant, a sum of Rs.1762.50 was deducted as insurance premium for cotton crop of kharif, 2018 by op no.1 and same was transferred to op no.3 for insurance of his cotton crop which was damaged due to natural calamities and an amount of Rs.9943.96 was deposited in the said account of complainant as compensation for kharif 2018 for village Makhosaran whereas land of complainant is situated in village Nezia Khera, District Sirsa and compensation paid is so less. There are further allegations of complainant that Chhotu Ram, Madan Lal and Ram Swaroop brothers of complainant also obtained loan from SBI ADB Branch, Sirsa with regards to land equivalent of the complainant and Rs.1749/- as insurance premium was deducted from their accounts on 30.7.2018 and they have been paid compensation of approximately Rs.70,000/- each. The complainant in order to prove his allegations has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and has also furnished copy of jamabandi Ex.C1, copy of particulars of complainant given by bank having land in village Nezia Khera. He also furnished copy of certificate given by bank dated 22.5.2019 Ex.C3 in which it has been admitted that due to clerical mistake during updating of insurance detail on PMFBY portal Makho Saran village entered instead of Nezia Khera.
8. It is proved from the evidence of complainant that complainant was holding land in village Nezia Khera which was mortgaged with op bank, but however, after loss of crop, claim has been settled and paid qua village Makhosaran despite the fact that complainant is not holding any land in this village. He had lodged claim qua loss of his crop in the land situated in village Nezia Khera and land of village Nezia Khera was got mortgaged by complainant but inadvertently op no.1 bank had got his crop insured in village Makho Saran knowing well that complainant is not having land in this village and this fact is clear from certificate of the bank Ex.C3. So, complaint of complainant stands proved against ops no.1 and 2. However, insurance company op no.3 cannot be held liable for mistake done by op bank and complaint against op no.3 stands dismissed.
9. In view of above, we allow this complaint against opposite parties no.1 and 2 and direct them to settle and pay the claim of complainant at par with other farmers of village Nezia Khera especially at par with brothers of complainant namely Chhotu Ram, Madan Lal and Ram Swaroop on the basis of their land holdings in village Nezia Khera within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be entitled to interest @7% on the claim amount from ops no.1 and 2 from the date of order till actual payment. However, ops no.1 and 2 will deduct the amount of Rs.9943.96 from the claim amount which amount has already been paid to the complainant. We further direct the ops no.1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member President,
Dated:18.02.2020. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
