BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.              

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 71 of 2021.                                                                           

                                                                Date of Institution :    19.03.2021.

                                                          Date of Decision   :    11.04.2023.

Ujjagar Singh son of Sh. Mithu Singh, resident of village Baragudha, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.

                                ……Complainant.

                             Versus.

1. Punjab & Sindh Bank, Branch Baragudha, Distt. Sirsa through its Manager.

2. The Oriental Insurance Company through its Divisional Manager Sirsa.

3. Deputy Director of Agricultural Department, Sirsa.

...…Opposite parties.

            Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before:       SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT                                   

                        SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………MEMBER.                               

                      SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA …………………MEMBER     

Argued by:  Complainant in person.

                   Sh. H.S. Aulakh, Advocate for opposite party No.1.

                   Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.2.

                   Sh. Satish Kumar, Statistical Assistant for opposite party no.3.

ORDER

                   The complainant has filed the present complaint 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 agricultural land in village Baragudha, Tehsil and District Sirsa and has an account No. KBC-1356 with op no.1. That op no.1 got insured the cotton crop of complainant under the Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna through op no.2 and in this regard op no.1 had deducted the amount of Rs.1500.40 on 24.07.2018 for insurance of kharif crop and later on deducted Rs.1796.40 on 26.10.2018 from the above account of complainant. It is further averred that crop of complainant was damaged which has been clearly shown in the J Farm according to which there was only 14 quintals 30 Kgs cotton crop in place of 30 quintals in 2½ acres. That complainant has not received compensation amount for the damage of crop  whereas other farmers of nearby villages of complainant i.e. of villages Jhiri and Anandgarh have already received claims amounts for the damage of their crops. It is further averred that complainant moved an application to C.M. Window, Sirsa and Deputy Director Agriculture but no action was taken in this regard. That op no.1 still deducting premium amounts for insurance of his crops. That complainant approached the ops and requested them to pay the compensation/ insured amount but the ops are putting off the matter off with one pretext or the other and now they have flatly effused to pay the same to the complainant by saying that in District Sirsa there was a better production of crops whereas crop of complainant was fully damaged and complainant being a very small farmer is entitled to get compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- from ops. The complainant also got served a legal notice to the ops but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.

3.       On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, locus standi, suppression of true and material facts, complaint is hopelessly time barred and estoppal etc. On merits, it is submitted that complainant has a KCC account with answering op bank and as per scheme of the Central Govt., the complainant had got insured his crops through answering op and as per instructions of complainant, the specified crop of complainant was got insured by answering op with insurance company. A sum of Rs.1544.41 was deducted by answering op on 24.07.2018 for Kharif 2018 crop and a sum of Rs.1796.40 on 15.12.2018 for rabi crop was deducted and answering op remitted the same to the insurance company. It is further submitted that complainant has not clarified as to which crop of complainant was damaged. Moreover, the compensation is to be paid by insurance company and not by answering op and agriculture department makes survey in the respective villages and then submits report to the insurance company and then compensation is paid by insurance company as per survey report. The answering op has no role to play in the same. It is further submitted that deduction of amount of Rs.4348/- on 29.07.2020 as insurance premium is matter of record. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.

4.       Op no.2 also filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding cause of action, non supply of timely intimation and maintainability etc. On merits, it is submitted that portal data uploaded by the bank shown the cotton crop of complainant in village Baragudha and there was no natural calamity or loss to the cotton crop of Kharif 2018 of village Baragudha reported/ verified by Agriculture department and so uploaded by the banker of complainant. It is further submitted that complainant is not entitled for any claim from answering op as there was no natural calamity or loss to the cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 of village Baragudha uploaded by the banker of complainant i.e. op no.1. No record of girdawari, inspection report, loss, insurance particular or intimation for the loss etc. has been placed on record. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.

5.       Op no.3 also filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that yield basis claims are settled by the insurance company only on completion of necessary formalities as prescribed in operational guidelines of scheme which have already been given by answering op within specific time period as prescribed in the operational guidelines of Government of India and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.3 made.

6.       Complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and copies of documents Ex. C1 to Ex.C14.

7.       On the other hand, op no.3 has tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. Babu Lal, Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sirsa as Ex.R1 and copies of documents Ex.R2 and Ex.R3.

8.       Op no.1 has tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. Mukesh Kumar, Branch Manager as Ex. RW1/A and statement of account Ex.R4.

9.       OP no.2 has tendered in evidence affidavit of Ms. Puja Incharge HUB Legal as Ex.R5 and copies of documents Ex.R6 and Ex.R7.

10.     We have heard complainant and learned counsel for ops no.1 and 2 as well as Sh. Satish Kumar, SA for op no.3 and have perused the case file.

11.     The complainant has alleged loss of his insured cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 in 2½ acres of the land situated in village Baragudha but he has not placed on file any cogent and convincing evidence to prove the alleged loss to his cotton crop in village Baragudha. Though complainant has alleged that he received yield of only 14 quintal 30 Kgs in place of 30 quintals of cotton crop and in this regard has placed on file J farm Ex.C14 but said document is not at all sufficient to prove the loss of cotton crop of complainant in Kharif, 2018 because J farm relates to the market committee and issued when the crop is sold in the market and it is not sufficient to prove actual loss because it cannot be easily said that whole yield of cotton crop received by complainant was brought in the market for selling the same. Further more, the op no.2 insurance company has placed on file block wise average yield of cotton crop as per crop cutting experiments conducted by Agriculture Department as Ex.R7 and said report has been issued by Agriculture State Officer, Deptt. of Agri. & Farmers Welfare Haryana, Panchkula on 19.09.2018 and as per this document the threshold yield of the village Baragudha was 577.26 Kgs. per hectare and average yield of village Baragudha was 641.40 Kgs. per hectare meaning thereby that there was no loss of cotton crop in village Baragudha as per operational guidelines of PMFBY. Further, op no.3 has placed on file village wise tabulation sheet of sum insured and claim under PMFBY during Kharif, 2018 as Ex.R3 according to which the average yield of village Baragudha in Kharif, 2018 was 698.58 Kgs. per hectare which is also higher than the threshold yield of cotton crop of Kharif, 2018. The complainant has not placed on file any other reliable and convincing evidence to prove alleged loss to his cotton crop in Kharif, 2018 and therefore, he is not entitled to any claim amount or compensation from any of the ops.  

12.     In view of our above discussion, the present complaint is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced.                             Member      Member                           President

Dt. 11.04.2023.                                                                        District Consumer Disputes                                                                                                        

                                                                                                 Redressal Commission, Sirsa.