BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 182 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 15.04.2019.
Date of Decision : 17.10.2022.
Milkh Raj aged about 55 years son of Shri Ram Chander, resident of village Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
Versus.
1. Punjab National Bank Dabwali Road, Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. ABW Towers, Unit No. 511-512, 5th Floor, M.G. Road, Iffco Chowk, Gurugram- 122001 through its Director.
...…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. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………………….MEMBER
Present: Sh. Anil Kumar Beniwal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. R.K. Mehta, 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 complainant is that he is an agriculturist having about 31 kanals 12 marlas of land situated in village Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa comprised in Khewat No. 232 as per jamabandi for the year 2016-2017. The complainant is having account no. 1947008800018015 and has availed KCC facility from op no.1 on his above said agriculture land. That for insurance of crops of complainant of Kharif, 2016 and Rabi 2016-2017, the premium was deducted on 28.07.2016 and 07.01.2017 respectively by op no.1 from the above account of complainant and the crop was insured with the then collaborated insurance company of the bank under Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna. It is further averred that similarly for insurance of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2017, a sum of Rs.2523.95 and Rs.981.92 were again deducted by op no.1 from the above said account of complainant on 31.07.2017 and this time op no.1 had got insured the crop from op no.2 but copy of the insurance policy was not supplied to him despite his requests. It is further averred that the crop of Kharif, 2017 in the village including his crop was destroyed/ damaged on account of natural calamities, pests/ diseases and draught and therefore, complainant is entitled to get compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- per acre. The complainant approached the ops and requested them to pay the claim of damages to his crop but on all the occasions, the ops asked the complainant to wait stating that the process of claims take sometime. In the meantime, op no.1 again deducted premium in the month of December, 2017 for insurance of wheat crop of Rabi, 2017-2018 and also in the month of July, 2018 for cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. That even after passing of more than one and half years, the complainant did not get claim whereas some of the villagers including his co-sharers have already received compensation within one year. The ops also failed to show any reason for non indemnification of the claim of complainant. It is further averred that both the ops in collusion with each other have deliberately done so for causing loss to the complainant and this amounts to gross negligence and deficiency of service on the part of ops. Hence, this complaint. .
3. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Op no.1 filed reply submitting therein that bank has debited the amount of premium from the account of complainant on 31.07.2017 and has credited the same to the account of op no.2 on 11.08.2017 as premium of the insurance for the farmers to the extent of Rs.6,33,858.96. All the information required by op no.2 was sent to the insurance company as per rules, but the same could not be uploaded in the portal of the insurance company for want of Adhar Card in the account of the complainant. The answering op bank had advertised several times with the appeal to the farmers to submit their adhar cards in their accounts. As the amount of insurance premium had been credited in the account of op no.2 and the insurance information could not be uploaded in the portal of the insurance company, as such, the kharif crop of 2017 was not insured by op no.2 for want of aadhar card in the account. It is further submitted that op no.2 has neither insured the crop of complainant nor has refunded the premium amount credited in their account by the bank in excess to the amount of premium of 254 farmers, which was Rs.6,15,820.30. There is no deficiency of the service on part of answering op. It is further submitted that crop of Kharif, 2016 and Rabi 2016-2017 was insured as there was no requirement of the adhar card at that time. The crop of Kharif, 2017 could not be insured for want of adhar card. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 filed reply raising certain preliminary objections regarding no coverage of alleged loss, insurance company cannot be questioned 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 submitted that insurance of farmer has been done on the basis of good faith and declaration made by bank of farmers. If any mistake is done by complainant or by bank of complainant, insurance company cannot be held liable for claim amount. On merits, the contents of complaint are denied. It is submitted that claim of complainants wa 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.
5. The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, khasra girdawari for the year 2017-2018 Ex.C1, postal receipt Ex.C2, RTI application Ex.C3, information under RTI Act EX.C4, copy of statement of account Ex.C5, copies of pass book Ex.C6, Ex.C7, postal receipt Ex.C8, copy of adhar card Ex.C9, copy of jamabandi Ex.C10, report of Assistant Statistical Officer office of Deputy Director Agriculture, Sirsa Ex.C11 and copy of Haryana Government Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department notification dated 13.06.2017 Ex.C12.
6. On the other hand, Op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Data Ram, Branch Manager Ex.R1, copy of statement of account Ex.R2, copy of account ledger inquiry Ex.R3 and status of insurance claim of farmers Ex. R4.
7. Op no.2 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 complainant has claimed insurance claim amount for the damage of his insured cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. From the copy of pass book of complainant as well as statement of account of complainant Ex.R2, it is evident that on 31.07.2017 amounts of Rs.981.92 and Rs.2523.95 were deducted by op no.1 bank for the account of complainant for insuring the cotton crop of complainant of Kharif, 2017 with op no.2 under PMFBY. The grievance of the complainant is that despite damage to his insured cotton crop of Kharif, 2017, he did not receive any insurance claim amount from any of the ops whereas his other villagers and even his co-sharers have already insurance claim for the damage of their cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. From the copy of khasra girdawari for the year 2017-2018 Ex.C1 placed on file by complainant, it is evident that Hans Raj brother of complainant is co-sharer in the agricultural land whose insurance claim for the damage of cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 was approved as per insurance claim status report of farmers placed on file by op no.1 as Ex.R4. So, it can be easily and certainly held there was also loss to the cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of complainant. Moreover, to prove the damage to the cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 in village Bupp, the complainant has also placed on file report of Assistant Statistical Officer, office of DDA, Sirsa as Ex.C11. From the perusal of said report Ex.C11, it is evident that average yield of cotton crop of village Bupp of Kharif, 2017 was 314.31 Kgs. lint per hectare. Further, from the perusal of Annexure A regarding threshold yield attached with Haryana Government notification dated 13.06.2017 (Ex.C12), it is evident that threshold yield of Sirsa block was 640.80 Kgs. per hectare and threshold yield of Baragudha block was 631.44 Kgs. per hectare and since the average yield of village Bupp of complainant was less than these two blocks, therefore, as per scheme of PMFBY as well as in view of clause No. 12 (b) (i) (ii) of Haryana Government notification dated 13.06.2017, there was loss of cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of village Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa. So, it is proved on record beyond any doubt that there was also loss to the cotton crop of complainant in Kharif, 2017 as he also owns land in village Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa. The op no.2 insurance company which has retained the premium for insuring cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of complainant and has already paid insurance claim to other farmers of village of complainant is liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant.
10. Now the question arises for consideration that to what amount of claim the complainant is entitled for from insurance company op no.2? In this regard, complainant has claimed claim amount of Rs.1,56,250/- at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre i.e. for his 3.125 acres of agricultural land. However, for calculation of claim amount, a formula has been given in the operational guidelines of PMFBY which is as under:-
Threshold Yield minus Actyal Yield X Sum Insured.
Threshold yield
11. The complainant owns 3.125 acres of agricultural land in village Bupp which is equal to 1.26 hectare. As mentioned above, the threshold yield of cotton crop of block Baragudha was 631.44 Kgs. per hectare and actual yield of village Bupp was 314.31 Kgs. per hectare. The sum insured of cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 in Sirsa District was 69000/- per hectare as per Annexure B attached with above said notification dated 13.06.2017 and therefore, the calculation of the claim amount for the loss of cotton crop of Kharif, 2017 of complainant in village Bupp/ Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa is as under:-
631.44 minus 314.31 multiple by
631.44 69000 X 1.26 hectare = Rs. 43,664/-.
12. From above calculation, it is evident that complainant is entitled to an claim amount of Rs.43,664/- from op no.2 for the loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. However, complaint against op no.1 is liable to be dismissed.
13. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint qua opposite party no.2 and direct op no.2 to pay claim amount of Rs.43,664/- alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 15.04.2019 till actual realization to the complainant for the loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2017. We also direct the opposite party no.2 to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as composite compensation for harassment including litigation expenses to the complainant. The op no. 2 is liable to comply with this order within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 71/72 of the C.P. Act, 2019 against op no.2. However, complaint qua op no.1 stands dismissed. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 17.10.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
