For the O.P.No.3 & 4: EXPARTE.
DATE OF FILING: 25.04.2013
DATE OF DISPOSAL: 18.10.2017
Dr. Alaka Mishra, Member (W):
The complainant has filed this consumer dispute under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in banking service against the Opposite Parties (in short the O.Ps) and for redressal of his grievance before this Forum.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he being a farmer by profession eking out his livelihood by cultivation mortgaged his landed property to the extent of 3 Ac and took a loan of Rs.18,000/- vide Account No.2010/46 and the said amount was sanctioned on 01.08.2011. It is also mentioned in the complaint that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.100/- deducted from the principal amount towards crop insurance and insured his crop. The insurance premium was paid in time as per the order of the Bank authorities, i.e. O.P. No.1 to 4 but they did not send the premium to Government for which the complainant did not get benefit of the crop insurance to the insurance company. It is also mentioned that his crop was affected by drought due to scarcity of water and as per crop survey report 82% of loan was waived by the Government. The complainant deposited the insurance amount of Rs.100/- in time but due to negligence on the part of O.Ps the complainant could not get the insurance benefit. He further mentioned in the complaint that he submitted an application before O.P.No.1 and 3 for necessary action but that also did not yield any result. Due to the latches and deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.No.1 to 4 the complainant suffered financially and approached from pillar to post but went in vain. When the O.Ps did not give any heed to his grievance he filed this consumer complaint before this Forum to recover the loan amount of Rs.18,000/- along with interest @18% per annum from the date of sanction i.e. 01.08.2011 and also prayed to direct the O.Ps to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, inconvenience and cost of litigation in the interest of justice.
3. On notice from this Forum, the O.P.No.1 & 2 appeared in this Forum on 04.07.2013 through learned counsel Sri Prabhat Kumar Padhi and Associates and filed his written version on 07.10.2013. In the written version it is stated that the contents of the complaint filed by the complainant are all not true and correct and the complainant is put to strict proof of same. The allegation made in the complaints which are not admitted by the O.P.No.1 & 2 are denied. It is stated that prior to 01.11.2012 Utkal Grameen Bank was not in existence at Gangapur, hence it is un-called for to describe O.P.No.2 by his name as the Ex-Branch Manager of UGB, Gangapur. It is also contended that the complainant is to prove that he had paid insurance amount in connection with his claim. The Kishan Card Scheme is sponsored by the Government and for that purpose established the Agricultural Insurance Company of India having Regional Office at Satyanagar, Bhubaneswar represented by its Regional Manager, who used to receive insurance amount relating to crop loan and if requires make payment of insurance amount to the beneficiaries. Hence, it is bad in law for non-joinder of necessary party like the said Insurance Company. It is also stated that soon after receipts of complaint and case notice the O.Ps made inquiry relating to the matter contacted to the Insurance Company over telephone to do the needful, but in reply they intimated over phone that the complainant has already received crop insurance amount of Rs.28,700/- through Aska Co-operative Central Bank, Aska relating to Kharif 2011 of Gangapur, SCS and thus he is not entitled further for insurance benefit in connection with the crop loan with RGB- Gangapur for the same year. He further stated that after getting such information the Bank Authorities went to Aska Cooperative Central Bank, Aska and verified their records relating to the matter and found that the complainant has received Rs.28,700/- for the purpose from the Bank against crop loan of Rs.35,000/-. It is also alleged that the said Bank refused to give in writing about the insurance disbursement. So the UGB Authorities approached before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Berhampur, for remedy vide its Memo No.1524 dated 04.06.2013 but the said letter was not complied by Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska for which the Utkal Grameen Bank again sent a letter in connection with the matter to the Secretary, Aska Cooperative Central Bank on 31.07.2013 for providing written information in the matter by 10.08.2013 and the copy of the same was also sent to Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Berhampur but till today no information received. Under the circumstances the UGB has no liability in the matter and it is submitted that the said Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska is a necessary party to answer the above and to produce documents relating to it as witness. It is also averred that the crop insurance to the farmers is sponsored by Government through Insurance Company and Bank has nothing to do in this connection. The premium, if any, paid relating to crop loan is automatically transferable to the account of said Insurance Agency through computer system and all insurance amount if paid relating to scheme are said to have received by the Government Insurance Company and if requires they used to pay the compensation to the beneficiaries. No Banking Organization is vested with the power of granting any type of insurance to anybody. It is also informed that the complainant has obtained an agricultural loan of Rs.28,000/- from the former RGB Gangapur since 1.11.2012 by executing loan documents and has not paid the amount to the Bank. So, with a bad intention to escape from the liability, suppress the matter relating to receipt of insurance amount for the year 2011. It is also stated that the complainant may approach the Insurance Company and this O.Ps has no objection if the said insurance Company paid the insurance claim to the complainant. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the O.Ps are no way liable to meet the claim of the complainant and it is misrepresentation of fact, therefore the complaint is not coming within the purview of Consumer Protection, 1986 and the Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter and the O.Ps are not properly described in the cause title. For the reason stated above the case before this Forum is not maintainable under the law, facts and circumstances and liable to be dismissed with cost to meet the ends of justice.
4. The Opposite Party No.3 and 4 did not appear and not filed any version hence set as ex-party on 16.12.2015 and the case proceeded against them exparte.
5. Today i.e. on 18.10.2017 the case is posted for compliance of order dated 04.10.2016, 17.01.2017and 20.02.2017 respectively by the complainant to add a necessary party to the Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska to this dispute as per the version filed by the O.P.No.1&2 vide para-8. However, despite several opportunities given by this Forum, the complainant did not prefer to add Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska as a necessary party to this dispute to know the insurance amount received by the complainant since as per the version of the O.P.No.1&2, the Insurance Company has disbursed the claim amount through Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska. In the meantime eight adjournments have already been availed by the complainant consecutively and the complainant has remained absent consecutively from 02.03.2017 till 18.10.2017. This is a year old case relating the year 2013 and the complainant does not show his interest to proceed with the case and even after repeated directions issued by this Forum he does not want to add the Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska as a necessary party in this case for proper adjudication of this consumer dispute. Instead of complying the order of the Forum dated 04.10.2016, 17.01.2017and 20.02.2017 the complainant filed his written argument on 02.02.2016. The Forum, therefore, decided to dispose of the matter on merit as per Section 13(2)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
6. On merit, it is not in dispute that the complainant is a loanee vide his loan account No.2010/46 dated 01.08.2011 who availed a loan amount of Rs.18,000/- from O.P.No.1&2 on mortgage of landed property to the extent of 3Ac. It is also a fact that the present Utkal Grameen Bank was formerly known as Rushikulya Gramya Bank (RGB) which is admitted by the O.P.No.1 &2 as per the written version. There is also no doubt or dispute that the complainant is a consumer under the O.Ps who deducted Rs.100/- towards crop insurance of the complainant as is evident from the Annexure –I to III of the documents filed by the complainant. However, in the complaint there is no mention of the name of the insurance company who has received the said premium from the banks and the O.Ps have also not disclosed the name of the insurance company in their written version. But, it is stated in the written version by the O.P.No.1&2 that the complainant has received Rs.28,700/- as insurance claim amount from the Insurance Company through Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska for the Kharif Season 2011 of Gangpur SCS. Accordingly, considering the fact and circumstance of the case, this Forum on 04.10.2016 directed the complainant to add a party to the said Bank to corroborate the fact but despite repeated directions he did not want to add the bank as a necessary party except filing his objection on 17.11.2016 stating that the complainant has not received any insurance claim amount through Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska and the O.P.No.1&2 has averred without any documentary proof thereof. Thus, the complainant is entitled to get insurance benefit since O.P.No.1slept over the matter and did not remit insurance premium amount even though deducted from the loan amount and therefore the complainant in his objection petition prayed to pay the relief as prayed in the main complaint. On 17.01.2017 he also filed an amendment petition under Order 6, Rule 17 of C.P.C. to comply the order of this Forum dated 04.10.2016 with a prayer to add the Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Aska as a necessary party to this consumer dispute. However, even though the Forum allowed the said petition but he did not file amended complaint and remained absent consecutively from 03.02.2017 till 18.10.2017. On perusal of documents placed on the case record we found that the learned counsel for O.P.No.1 & 2 has filed some relevant documents in support of his case like a letter issued by the Office of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Berhampur Division, Berhampur regarding submission of a report from the Secretary, Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska with a memo to Regional Manager, Utkal Grameen Bank, Berhampur regarding submission of report on the farmers taking loan and receiving crop insurance from Gangapur SCS vide Memo No.1524 dated 04.06.2013. He has also filed a letter bearing No.ADV/183 dated 31.07.2013 of Utkal Grameen Bank, Regional Office, Brahampur issued to the Gangapur SCS seeking information on crop insurance claims received by farmers along with particulars of RBKC borrowers of Gangapur pertaining to the year 2011-12. From the aforesaid documents it appears that the O.P.No.1 & 2 was contemplating to ensure the disbursement of insurance benefit to the loanee farmers but the said Aska Central Cooperative Bank did not reply. In the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in our considered view, it is highly necessary that the Aska Central Cooperative Bank, Aska be made a necessary party to this dispute for proper adjudication of the matter. However, the complainant is not interested to proceed with the case and even despite repeated directions given he has not preferred to add the said Bank as a necessary party, so it is also not feasible for the Forum to ensure the same. In the foregoing fact and circumstances, it will be difficult and prejudice to direct the O.Ps to pay insurance claim of the complainant since the insurance company is also not made a party to this dispute. In view of the above, the O.Ps can’t saddle the responsibility alone for compensating the crop loss of 82% for merely transferring the premium amount to the insurance company. It is also a fact that in this case as per contention of the O.P.No.1&2 the complainant has also not made Insurance Company as a necessary party who has received the premium amount towards crop loan of the complainant so the Forum is also in dark and does not know who is the insurer of the crops of the complainant. The claim amount of the complainant to be paid by the insurance company but Insurance Company has not been made a party to this dispute. In our considered view, the claim can’t be adjudicated without foundational facts. Therefore, the prayer of the complainant cannot be accepted and no relief can be granted by this Forum. In view of the above discussion and considering the fact and circumstances of the case we feel that the complaint of the complainant bears no merit, hence ordered to be dismissed.
7. In the result, we dismissed the case of the complainant against all O.Ps due to devoid of merit and in the peculiar fact and circumstance the parties are directed to bear their cost.
8. The order is pronounced on this day of 18th October 2017 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the parties free of cost and a copy of same be sent to the server of
