Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/148/2023

The Secretary, Z160, Primary Agricultural Credit Society Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

S. Manimegalai, W/o Subramanian & 2 Others - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. U. Kathiravan

31 Mar 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI - 3.

 

BEFORE    Hon’ble THIRU. JUSTICE  R. SUBBIAH              ::      PRESIDENT                       

                   Thiru.R VENKATESA PERUMAL                         ::      MEMBER

 

F.A. No.148/2023

 

(Against the Order made in C.C.No.34/2020, dated:13.06.2022 on the file of the

D.C.D.R.C., Nagapattinam)

 

TUESDAY, THE 31^ST DAY OF MARCH 2023

 

The Secretary,

z 160, Primary Agricultural Credit Society Ltd.,

Adhamangalam,

Thirukuvalai Taluk,

Valathamangalam,

Killukudi Post, Kilvelur Taluk,

Nagapattinam District.                                              ..  Appellant / 1^st Opposite party. 

 

-Versus-

1. S. Manimegalai,

W/o. Mr. Subramanian,

Road Street, Valathamangalam,

Killukudi Post,

Kilvelur Taluk,

Nagapattinam District.                                             .. 1^st Respondent / Complainant.  

 

2. The Branch Manager,

The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,

Nagapattinam District.                          

 

3. The Zonal Manager,

The New India Assurance Company Limited,

Chennai – 600 002.                        .. Respondents 2 & 3 / Opposite parties 2 & 3.  

 

Counsel for the Appellant / 1^st Opposite party           : M/s. U. Kathiravan

 

Counsel for the 1^st Respondent / Complainant          : M/s. V. Sakthivel

 

Counsel for the Respondents 2 & 3 /

Opposite parties 2 & 3                                               : M/s. S. Dhakshanamoorthy

This appeal coming before us on various dates and for final hearing today on 31.03.2023 and on hearing the arguments of the appellant and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following Order in the open court:-

ORDER

Thiru.R VENKATESA PERUMAL , MEMBER                       

1.     The 1^st opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.    The 1^st respondent is the complainant and the 2^nd & 3^rd respondents are the 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties before the District Commission.

2.         For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to here as they stood arrayed in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagapattinam.

3.         The case of the 1^st respondent before the District commission is that he was carrying on agricultural activities in various lands consists in different survey numbers at Kizhvelur Taluk, Satiyakudi Revenue Village, Nagapattinam District.  He applied for the agricultural loan to the 1^st opposite party in the year 2019 under Bheema Yojana Insurance Scheme.  He has also paid the necessary charges for the same.  In the mean time, in the year 2019, the entire crops were damaged by the insects.   The damaged crops were assessed by the complainant to Rs.30,000/- per acre.  Hence, notice was issued to the opposite parties 1 & 2 on 07.01.2020 to pay the compensation amount under the crop insurance.   But the opposite party has not come forward to pay the said amount after exchange of correspondences.   Finally, the complainant has filed the present complaint. 

4.         The 1^st opposite party had not appeared before the District Commission and was set exparte.  The 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties have filed their version.  The sum and substance of the version filed by the 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties is that during the relevant period of damages to the crops, there was no insurance coverage and therefore, they need not pay any compensation amount.  The District Commission accepting the said defence directed the appellant / 1^st opposite party herein to pay a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- to the complainant as crop insurance compensation amount, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs.25,000/- towards costs.  Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the 1^st opposite party for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits.

5.         The Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the appellant is only a nodal agency as far as the issue of crop insurance is concerned.  The authority who has to offer and sanction the claim of crop insurance (Viz) Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd. was not at all joined as a party in the proceedings.  M/s. Kumbakonam Central Co-operative Bank is the nodal agency to whom the crop insurance premium was paid and the said has not been added as a party by the 1^st respondent / complainant.   The 1^st opposite party has no role in providing compensation for crop loss as alleged to have been suffered by the complainant.  Therefore, the non-inclusion of the insurance company as a party in the proceedings is fatal to the complaint.   The appellant is having valid defence in this case. Thus, he prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.

6.         We have heard the submissions on the side of the appellant and perused the materials placed on record. 

7.         Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for appellant, we are of the considered opinion that there is some force in the arguments of the appellant/ 1^st opposite party , and therefore a chance may be given to the 1^st opposite party to agitate their right on merit.  Eventhough on considering the lethargic attitude of the 1^st opposite party in not filing their written version though preferred to enter appearance, we are inclined to allow this appeal on imposing a cost of Rs.3000/-  as cost to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission by way of Demand Draft drawn in favour of the Registrar, State Commission, Chennai, which was complied with.   Hence, this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

7.         In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Nagapattinam, in C.C. No.34/2020 dt.13.06.2022 and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Nagapattinam for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

The parties are directed to appear before the District Commission, Nagapattinam on 28.04.2023, for taking further instructions. On which date itself, the 1^st opposite party shall file his Vakalath, Written version, proof affidavit and documents if any.  The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint, within three months from the date of appearance, according to law on merits.  

The amount deposited, by the appellant, shall remain in the custody of this commission, till the order passed in the original complaint.

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                                                             R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                                                                              PRESIDENT

 

KIR/TNSCDRC/Chennai/Orders/March/2023.