Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/516/2019

Smt Suriya Khanam, W/o Adam Khan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorised Signatory, United India Insurance Com.Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Sri P.S.Sathyanarayana Rao

20 Jun 2020

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:06/09/2019

DISPOSED      ON:20/06/2020

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:516/2019

 

DATED: 20th  June 2020

PRESENT :-     Smt. H.N. MEENA.              …. PRESIDENT

                                B.A., LL.B.,               

                             Smt. B.H. YASHODA         ....MEMBER

                               B.A., LL.B.,

……COMPLAINANT/S	Smt. Suriya Khanam, W/o Adam Khan, Aged about 63 Years, Agriculturist, Ajjappanahalli Village, Yelagodu Post, Bharamasagara Hobli, Represented by their Son G.P.A Holder-Ayub Khan, S/o Adam Khan, Aged about 48 Years, Agriculturist, Ajjappanahalli Village, Yelagodu Post, Bharamasagara Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk. (Rep by Sri.P.S. Sathyanarayana Rao, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	The Authorised Signatory, United India Insurance Company Limited, D.R.M. Hospital Complex, 3rd Block, Neelakanteshwara Badavane, Chitradurga. (Rep by OP.1 by Sri. K. Mohan Bhata)

Pronounced on 20th June 2020

Written by Smt. H.N. MEENA, President.

ORDERS

The complainant in the cases have filed these complaint against the OPs for issued direction to pay the insurance amount with interest and mental agony, loss of time and for such other reliefs. Since the above complaints have been filed against the same OPs, for the similar reliefs and compensation thereon and also for costs and interest and since the above matters are similar and for the sake of convenience they have been above cases have been posted for orders. 

2. The complainant in complaint No.516/2019 is the absolute owner of the land bearing SY. No. 24/1 measuring 3 acre  39 guntas, The complainant shows own Maize crop in the above said lands during kharaff-2018-19. It is further submitted that, the complainants in all the cases have paid the respective premium amount through OP insurance company under Pradhan Manthri Fasal BimaYojana (PMFBY) as per the Orders of Government of India with an objectives of, to provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests and diseases. Accordingly maize crop of the complainants was failed due to shortfall of rain and losing of crops in the said village in year 2018-19. Due to loss of the groundnut crop, the complainants approached the OP  for claiming compensation amount, has repudiated the same and stating that there is no crop loss of the former in the said village. The complainants have issued the legal notice to the OP. After receiving of the notice they have not settled the claim. Hence the present complaints.  

3. After issuance of notice to the OP appeared through one Sri K. Mohan Bhat filed Vakalath on behalf of OP and filed version.  In rest of the complaints.

4. According to the version filed by the OP  it is true that the complainants having agricultural lands as stated supra in Ajjappanahally village.  Further it is true that they Petitioner had paid premium of Rs.2,012.70/- to cover Maiza (makka) crop in S.No.24/1 measuring 4A 39G land in Ajjappanahalli Village, Bharamasagara Hobli, Chitradurga a sum of Rs.1,00,635/- through Saving Account, to cover Maiza (Makka). State Government in Samrakshne portal 2018 mentioned that the said Gram Panchayat was draught area and short of rainfall or bad weather. As per the scheme, in case of inadequacy of rainfall or due to bad weather, insured farmer is not able to sow in his insured land then as per the Government operational guidelines regulations issued by Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, New Delhi,  The officer of the Agricultural Department have inspected the spot and asses the loss of crops and submitted the report to the concerned authority.  The OP  is held responsible for settling the claim of the complainants as per the guidelines and asses the said area is shortfall due to bad weather, and as per the assessment of the said authority the O.P. No.1 -Insurance Co., was paid Rs.41,661.93/- to petitioner’s bank account and continuation of the said policy cover will be cancelled soon after claim. The petitioner also admitted that the said amount is received from opponent. As per the data given by the Government, there is loss of crops in the said village in year 2018-19. PMFBY is being implemented in the country under the orders of Government with an objectives to provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests and diseases. Therefore we are not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner, and there is no deficiency in serves to the side of Respondents.

5.      Complainants themselves have examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-4 were got marked and closed his side.  

 

6.     Arguments heard.

7.     Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OP No.2 have failed to deposit the insured amount to the complainants account and committed deficiency of service to the complainant and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaints?

              (2) What order?

8.     Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                Point No.1:-Partly in negative. 

                Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

9.      Point No.1:- There is no dispute between both parties that, the complainants are the absolute owners of lands situated at Ajjappanahalli Village, Chitradurga taluk and District stated supra and have sowed the Maize crop during the year 2017-18 Khariff season in the said lands, they have paid the respective premium amount through OP No.1 insurance company under Pradhan Manthri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) as implemented in the country under the Orders of Government with an objectives of, to provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests and diseases, as maize crop of the complainants was failed due to shortfall of rain and sustained loss of crops in the said village in the year 2018-19, they have approached the OP No.2 claiming compensation amount, but the OP No.2 has repudiated the same stating that there is no crop loss of the formers in the said village due to shortfall of rain.

10. According to the EX-A 1 TO 2 produced by the complainants, it is proves that they all are having SB A/c in OP No.1 bank and they have pair premium amount to the OP.

11.  The allegation of the complainants is that due to short fall of rain their crop was lost in the year 2018-19 hence they are entitled to get insurance amount as claimed by them. To prove their contention the complainants have not produced any document to show that during the alleged year their crop was lost due to short fall of rain. Further at the time of arguments, the counsel appearing for the OP submits that the produced Government of Karnataka circular No.JDA(CI)kh2018 prevented showing/31/2018-19 dt.4-1-2019, and major corps shortfall 2018-19 issued by the Governments of Karnataka clearly mentioned that the petitioner sustained loss in his land as per the norms, and As per the scheme, in case of inadequacy of rainfall or due to bad weather, insured farmer is not able to show in his insured land then as per the Government assessment we have paid claim amount of Rs.41,661.93/- to petitioner’s bank account. The petitioner also admitted that the said amount is received from opponent. the opponent paid the amount of Rs.41,661.93/- already paid. Moreover the petitioner not produced any documents to show that he sustained loss in his land, and opponent prove that as per the guidelines issued by the Government of Karnataka they are paid to the amount of Rs.41,661.93 before filling this case to petitioner, and the same is accepted by petitioner in his petition and affidavit. There is no deficiency of service of opponent. In view of above reasons of the same we pass the following order.

 

ORDER

The complaint against opponent is here by dismissed with no cost.

The assistant registrar is directed to send free copies of this order to the all the parties free of cost within a week from today.

(This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 20/06/2020 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

                                     

       (B.H. Yashoda)                                       (H.N. Meena)       

         Member                                                    President.

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainants:

PW-1:  Complainants by way of affidavit evidence in all the cases.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP No.2:

DW-1: Sri. Ramesh.P, Senior Executive of OP  by way of affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainants in all the cases:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Acknowledgement
02	Ex-A-2:-	RTC

Documents marked on behalf of OP:

                                        NIL

 

 

MEMBER                                                                      PRESIDENT

Kms