Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/51/2018

Nagamma - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. Thimmalapura Ravi

08 Mar 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON :05/05/2018

               DISPOSED ON:08/03/2019

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

 

CC. NOs. 44 to 51/2018 DATED:8th MARCH 2019

 

PRESENT :-     SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH :      PRESIDENT                             B.A., LL.B.,

                        SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

                                BSc., MBA., DHA.,

LADY MEMBER

COMPLAINANT/S

C.No.44/2018   Smt. Sumitramma, W/o Late Shivashankar Reddy, Age: 57 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Ghataparthi Village, Challakere, Chitradurga. C.No.45/2018   B. Lakshmana Reddy, S/o Hanumantha Reddy, Age: 74 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Agriculturist, R/o Hanumanthanahalli Village, Challakere, Chitradurga.   C.No.46/2018   Somashekara Reddy, Age: 48 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Ghataparthi Village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga.   C.No.47/2018   Smt. Lakshmibai, W/o Late Peekya Naika, Age: 65 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Budnahatti village, Challakere, Chitradurga.   C.No.48/2018   H. Thippeswamy, S/o Hanumanthappa, Age: 64 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Hanumanthanahalli Village, Challakere, Chitradurga.   C.No.49/2018   Smt. Sarojamma, W/o Palaiah, Age: 52 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Hanumanthanahalli Village, Challakere, Chitradurga.   C.No.50/2018   Sri. Sathyanna Yuvaraj, S/o Thimmappa, Age: 40 Years, Agriculturist, R/o Hanumanthanahalli Village, Challakere, Chitradurga.   C.No.51/2018   Smt. Nagamma W/o Sri. Anantha Reddy, Aged about 53 years, Agriculturist, Hanumanthanahalli Village, Challakere Taluk.    (Rep by Smt/Sri.T. Ravishankar,  Advocate)

OPPOSITE PARTIES

C.Nos.44/2018 to 51/2018   1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Taluk office Opp., Chitradurga Road, Challakere Town, Chitradurga Dist.,   2. The Chief Manager, Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited, 3rd Floor, J.P. and Devi Jambukeshwara Arcade, No. 69, Millers Road, Bangalore   (Rep by Smt/Sri.C.J. Lakshminarasimha, Advocate for OP No.1 and Sri. B.M. Ravichandra, Advocate for OP No.2)

 

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH: PRESIDENT

ORDER

The complainants in all the cases have been filed the above complaints U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 against the opposite parties to direct the OPs to pay insurance amount with interest at the rate of 2% p.m, Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony and to grant such other reliefs.

2.     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 clubbed together and after hearing the arguments, above cases have been posted for orders. 

3.     Brief facts of the complaint is that, the complainants in Complaint No.44/2018 to 51/2018 are having agricultural lands situated at Gataparthi and Chitranayakanahalli, Hanumanthanahalli, Budnahatti, Gourasamudra villages, Challakere taluk and they have sown Maize and tourdal and groundnut crops in their lands and insured the said crops under PMFBY.  For that, they have paid premium amount under PMFBY to the OP No.2 through OP No.1.  It is further submitted that, the complainant in complaint No.44/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
214/1	3-00	Maize	Rs.1,408-36	Rs.70,417-80
213/1	19-37	Maize	Rs.9,353-08	Rs.4,67,654-00
211/1	4-00	Tourdal	Rs.1,327-42	66,370-80
115/1	11-22	Tourdal	Rs.3,832-60	Rs.1,91,629-90

 

The complainant in complaint No.45/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
21/2	7-00	Groundnut	Rs.2,492-95	Rs.1,24,647-60

 

The complainant in complaint No.46/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
115/3	5-00	Tourdal	Rs.1,659-27	Rs.82,963-50

 

The complainant in complaint No.47/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
61/3	10-00	Groundnut	Rs.3,561-36	Rs.1,78,068-00

The complainant in complaint No.48/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
170/1	22-39	Groundnut	Rs.8,181-62	Rs.4,09,081-20

 

The complainant in complaint No.49/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
118	5-02	Groundnut	Rs.1,798-46	Rs.89,922-80

 

The complainant in complaint No.50/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
39	8-00	Groundnut	Rs.2,849-09	Rs.1,42,454-40
72	3-20	Groundnut	Rs,1,246-17	Rs.62,308-40

 

The complainant in complaint No.51/2018 has paid the premium amount under the said scheme as shown below:

Sy.No.		Crop	Premium amount	Insurance amount
190/P1	06-09	Groundnut	Rs.2,216-81	Rs.1,10,840-40

 

The crop sown in the above said lands have been completely failed.  But the OP No.2 has not paid the insurance amount to the complainants in all the complaints.  The complainants have visited the OP No.1 several times, but it went in vain.  Thereafter on 24.07.2017, the OP No.1 written a letter to the Deputy General Manager, State Lead Bank Branch, Bangalore.  The OP No.1 has send the premium amount to OP No.2 within the time, but the OPs have not paid the insurance amount to the complainants in all the complaints.  The Joint Director of Agriculture, Chitradurga has written a letter on 10.08.2017 to the Commissioner, Department of Agriculture requesting to pay the insurance amount to the complainants.  But, the OPs have failed to pay the insurance amount to the above complainants.  Thereafter, the complainants have issued legal notice to the OPs on 03.01.2018, the same has been served to OP No.1 and 2 on 04.01.2018, but the failed to reply to the same or to pay the insurance amount to the complainants.  The cause of action for these complaints arose in the month of August 2016 when the premium amounts have been paid to the OPs for the Khariff season 2016-17, which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and prayed for allow the complaint. 

4.     After issuance of the notice to the OPs, OP No.1 appeared through Sri.C.J. Lakshminarasimha, Advocate and Sri. B.M. Ravichandra, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.2 and filed their version. 

According to the version filed by OP No.1, it is submitted that, the OP No.1 has paid the crop insurance to OP No.2 within time as per the guidelines of the Government through DD/on-line bearing DDs in favour of OP No.2 in respect of crop insurance premium amount of the complainants in all the cases.  The OP No.1 has followed all the procedure with respect to fulfilling the crop insurance premiums except some technical errors.  The crop insurance premiums of several farmers including the complainants were acknowledged by the OP No.2 and the DDs sent by the OP No.1 is already realized to the OP No.2 well within time.  If the OP No.1 has not fulfilled the necessary procedures of payments of crop insurance premiums of the farmers, then the OP No.2 shall have to return the same to OP No.1 with necessary reasons or endorsements.  But the OP No.2 has not sent back the crop insurance premium amounts of the farmers/complainants in all the cases till this day.  The same is clearly and properly informed to the complainants in all the cases and therefore, the complainants in all the cases are not entitled any reliefs against the OP No.1.  As per the records and as per the policy with procedure of crop insurance, the OP No.2 is held responsible to pay the crop insurance as per the survey of the Government of Karnataka.  The OP No.1 has followed all the necessary procedures in respect of the payments of the crop insurance premiums to the OP No.2 within time and the same was clearly realized to the account of OP No.2.  If any discrepancies found by the procedure of the OP No.1, then the OP No.2 shall return the said payments to the OP No.1 within no time but the same is not done by the OP No.2.  Hence, if the complainants are entitled for any claims as per the policy of insurance or procedure of insurance or if they are eligible for the same, the OP No.2 is held responsible for the same and this OP No.1 is not liable to fulfill any of the reliefs claimed by the complainants in all the cases and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaints against OP No.1.

OP No.2 filed version denying all the averments made in the complaints.  It is submitted that, the OP No.2 is not aware of the facts that, the complainants in all the cases are the owners of the lands as stated in their complaints, which are rain fed lands and the averments of the complainants are denied as false the same are put to strict proof of the same.  This OP is not aware of the facts that, the OP No.1 has collected insurance premium amount towards PMFBY and the insured value as stated in the complaints from the complainants in all the cases, the same are denied as false and put to strict proof of the same.  It is not known that, the Challakere Taluk did not receive adequate rainfall and there was a drought in the region and the crops were failed and the complainants have suffered severe loss due to crop failure and also as per the Government survey the entire crop was failed and the same is denied as false.  It is not known that, the complainants in all the cases have approached OP No.1 and in turn OP No.1 assured to release the insurance amount to the complainants and the same are denied as false and put to strict proof of the same.  The OP No.2 is not aware of the fact that, the complainants have issued legal notices on 03.01.2018 through their counsel and the same were delivered on OP No.2 and it is not known to this OP that, the complainants have paid the premium amount towards PMFBY Scheme.  The complainants have not approached this Forum with clean hands as required under C.P Act and law of insurance under MV Act for the following reasons.

That if at all the above proposals of the complainants were accepted by the OP No.1, but the same were not forwarded to the OP No.2 and they are still pending at Bank’s end and hence, the OP No.2 has failed to submit the said proposals even on the extended date i.e., 8^th December 2016, not only that the proposals were not forwarded by the OP No.1 to OP No.2 but also the stated applications of the complainants in all the cases were not shared by the OP No.1 with OP No.2 and the said applications were still pending with the OP No.1 and therefore, on non submission of the application forms and premium amount in favour of the complainants in all the cases, OP No.2 is not liable for any payment or compensation to the complainants.  It is submitted that, the premium debit cutoff date was 10^th August 2016 and Banks were suppose to send all the proposals within 15^th August 2016, but with the directions of department as the portal was introduced for the first time the proposal acknowledgement date was extended till 8^th December 2016.  OP No.2 had to close acceptance of proposals and further any kind of alteration/change in date was not possible as it would have caused in adverse effect on selection of proposal, hence OP No.2 is not liable for payment of compensation to the complainants in all the cases.  As per the operational guidelines and tender notification of the Government, any pending data with the banks which was forwarded to insurance company after 08.12.2016 are still pending with the Banks, therefore any claim regarding these applications cannot be accepted by the insurance company and accordingly any liability towards claim settlement falls on the OP No.1 and hence, in view of all the above said reasons, OP No.2 has not made any deficiency in service to the complainants in all the cases and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaints against OP No.2.  

 

5. Complainants in the cases have examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and relied on documents Ex A-1 to A-6 and closed their side. OP No.1 has examined one Sri. K.R. Ramesh, the Chief Manager as DW-1 and Sri. Krishna Sheernalli, as DW-2 Ex.B-1 and B-2 documents have been got marked and closed their side.

 

6. Heard the arguments.

 

7.     Now the Points that arise for our consideration for the decision of the complaint are that:-

 

Point No.1:-Whether the complainants in all the cases prove that, the OP No.1 has send the proposal form to the OP No.2 in time and further OP No.2 is liable to pay the crop insurance under PMBFY and entitled for the reliefs as prayed in all the complaints?

 

Point No.2:- What order?

 

 

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

 

                Point No.1:-Partly Affirmative.

                Point No.2:- As per the final order.

::REASONS::

 

9. Point No. 1:-It is not in dispute that the complainants in all the cases are having agricultural lands as stated above.  The said persons have paid the crop insurance premium amounts to the OP No.1 and in turn, the OP No.1 send the same to OP No.2.  It is pertinent to note that, regularly the complainants in all the cases were growing groundnut/maize/Tourdal crops in their respective lands as stated in their complaints.   During Khariff 2016 season, they have insured their crops under PMFBY Scheme by paying premium amount to the OP No.2 through OP No.1.  Due to failure of rain, the crops were failed. OP No.1 says that, they have collected the premium amount and send the same to OP No.2 insurance company within time as fixed by the Government, the OP No.2 is liable to pay the insurance amount to the complainants in all the above cases.  The complainants have sent legal notice to the OPs for payment of insurance amount, but the OPs have not given any reply or settled the claim towards loss of crop.  Then the complainants in all the cases have filed these complaints.  It is argued by the Advocate for the complainants that, OP No.1 has collected the premium amount from the complainants in all the cases and the same has been sent to the OP No.2 Insurance Company.  The Advocate for OP No.1 stated that, it is true that, the complainant has paid the premium amount and send the same to OP No.2 within the time fixed by the Government.  The Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.2 submits that, it is not correct to state that, the OP No.1 has send the insurance premium within time and the premium collected from the complainants are still pending with the OP No.1, therefore, they are not liable to pay the compensation. 

10.  We have gone through the entire documents filed by both the parties, it clearly shows that, the complainants in all the cases have paid the premium amount to the OP No.1 and in turn, the OP No.1 send the same to OP No.2 well in time.  As per the exhibits produced by the complainant, it clearly shows that, the OP No.1 has sent the premium amount to the OP No.2.  As per the acknowledgement produced by the OP No.1, it clearly shows that, the OP No.2 has collected the premium amount from the OP No.1.  Here the OP No.2 has committed deficiency of service in settling the crop insurance amount to the complainant.  Hence, the OP No.2 is liable to pay the insurance amount to the complainants in all the cases.  Once, the insurance company collected the premium amount from the farmers, it is its bounden duty to settle the insurance amount if the crop failed due to failure of rainfall/natural calamities @ 80% of the insured amount. Accordingly, we answer Point No.1 held as affirmative. 

 

11.   Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein, we pass the following:

 

 

ORDER

The Complaint No.44/2018 to Complaint No.51/2018 filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 are hereby partly allowed.

 

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.6,36,800/- to the complainant in complaint No.44/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.96,480/- to the complainant in complaint No.45/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.66,400/- to the complainant in complaint No.46/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,42,400/- to the complainant in complaint No.47/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,27,200/- to the complainant in complaint No.48/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.71,920/- to the complainant in complaint No.49/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,63,760/- to the complainant in complaint No.50/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization. 

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.91,200/- to the complainant in complaint No.51/2018 along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.  

 It is further ordered that, the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- each towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- each towards costs of this proceedings to the complainants in all the complaints. 

Complaint filed as against OP No.1 is dismissed.

It is further ordered that, the OP No. 2 is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

          Keep the original of this order in C.No.44/2018 and the copies be in other cases.

(This order is made with the consent of Lady Member after the correction of the draft on 08/03/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signature)

 

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                       PRESIDENT

 

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainants in C.No.44/2018  to 51/2018.

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

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs in C.No.44/2018  to 51/2018.

DW-1:- Sri. K.R. Ramesh, the Chief Manager by filing affidavit evidence.

DW-2:- Sri. Krishna Sheernalli, by filing affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant in C.No.44/2018  to 51/2018:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Acknowledgements towards receipt of premium amount in all the cases
02	Ex-A-2:-	Proposal forms in all the cases
03	Ex-A-3:-	Letter dated 24.07.2017 to Deputy General Manager, State Lead Bank, Bangalore by OP No.1 in all the cases
04	Ex.A-4:-	Letter dated 10.08.2017 to the Commissioner, Department of Agriculture by Joint Director, Department of Agriculture, Chitradurga in all the cases.
05	Ex.A-5:-	Legal notice dated 03.01.2018 in all the cases
06	Ex.A-6:-	Postal acknowledgements in all the cases

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Letter dated 13.12.2017 to OP No.2 by OP No.1 in all the cases
02	Ex-B-2:-	Letter dated 24.07.2017 by OP No.1 to the Commissioner of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Bangalore in all the cases

 

 

LADY MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Rhr.