DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, | Behind Tahasildar Office, Basaveshwar Nagar, GADAG |
|
| |
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.351/2008 DISPOSED ON 16th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 |
|
|
| |
BEFORE: | | | HON'BLE MR. D.Y. BASAPUR, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) PRESIDENT | | HON'BLE Mr. RAJU. N. METRI, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) MEMBER HON'BLE Mrs. YASHODA BHASKAR PATIL, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) M.Ed., WOMAN MEMBER |
|
Complainants :- | 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14 15. | Vijayakumar Jnanajeeva Doddameti Prabhanna Hanumappa Gubbenakoppa (Dead) Maheshwarappa Snakappa Kori Andappa Lingappa Hoogar Ashok Veerappa Yavagal Prabhanna Kallappa Palled (Dead) Goutam Jnanadev Doddameti Channappa Jananadev Doddameti Rudrappa Ayyappa Doddameti Nagappa Basappa Kammar Paramma W/o Maredeppa Kudari Andanappa Hanumappa Gubbenakoppa Ashok Ningappa Jogi. Anand Jnanadev Doddameti Ramappa Dyamappa Rayavanaki All complainants are Age:Major Occ:Agril. R/o Jakkali Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.B.B.V.Neeraloti, Adv.) |
V/s
Respondents :- | 1.
2. 3. | Indian Agricultural insurance company of India Ltd., Regional office (Karnataka) 1st Floor, Shankara Narayan Building 25, M.G,.Road, Bangalore-01. (Rep. by Sri.K.V.Kerur, Advocate) The Manager, V.S.S. Bank Branch:Jakkali Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.N.S.Bichagatti,, Advocate) The Government of Karnataka Through its District Commissioner, Gadag District Gadag. (Rep. by DGP, Gadag) |
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SRI. RAJU.N.METRI, MEMBER
The complainants have filed the complaint U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for recovery of crop insurance amount of Rs.1,97,780/- with interest @ 12% p.a. Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and cost of the proceedings to complainant.
1. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
Complainants are resident of Jakkali village of Ron Taluk Dist:Gadag. They have grown Greengram and Onion for the year 2004-05 in Kharif season and paid the premium amount as shown in the schedule through OP No.2. Due to shortage of rain, complainants have suffered loss. Inspite of repeated request to Ops, they did not settle the claim. So, Ops have committed the deficiency of service. Hence, filed this complaint.
2. In pursuance of service of notice, OP No.1 & 2 appeared through counsel and OP No.3 appeared through DGP. OP No.1 to 3 filed written version.
3. The brief facts of the written version filed by OP No.1 are as under:
OP No.1 denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the year 2004-05 in Kharif season. As per the yield data furnished by the Director of Economics and Statistics, there was no shortfall to the crops for the year 2004-05 in Kharif season. So, there is no deficiency of service committed by this OP. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The brief facts of written version filed by OP No.2 are as under:
OP No.2 have denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the Kharif season 2004-05. OP No.2 stated that, they are acting as collecting agent and mediator between the complainants and OP No.1, they have received the proposal forms, premium amount and submitted to OP No.1. They are not responsible and there is no deficiency of service committed by OP No.2. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
5. The brief facts of the written version filed by OP No.3 are as under:
OP No.3 denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the year 2004-05 in Kharif season. Complainants are not a consumer to this OP and are only having supervising power over the other Ops. So there is no deficiency of service. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
6. After hearing, my predecessor, passed common judgment on 30.09.2008 and awarded compensation. OP No.1 has challenged the judgment in Appeal No.1601/09 before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, the same came to be allowed on 19.11.2010 and remanded for fresh disposal.
7. After receipt of the records, notices were issued to the parties. After hearing, my predecessor, again passed judgment on 06.01.2016 and awarded compensation. Being aggrieved by the judgment, OP No.1 again preferred an Appeal No.474/16 before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore and the same came to be allowed on 03.02.2020 and remanded for fresh disposal.
8. After receipt of the records, notices were issued to the parties. Notices served to complainant No.1, 3,4,5,7,8,9,10 to 14 and Ops. Complainant No.2 is reported as dead no LRs brought on record. KVK, Adv. filed power for OP No.1. NSB, Adv. taken notice for OP No. 2. DGP. filed M/A and written version for OP No.3. Complainant No.1 filed affidavit and examined as PW-1 and got marked the documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-72. Ops have not chosen to file affidavit evidence.
9. OP No.1 filed written arguments. No argument advanced on both side inspite of sufficient time given.
10. The points for consideration to us are as under:
- Whether the complainants prove that, there is a deficiency of service committed by the OPs?
- Whether the complainants prove that, they are
entitled for relief?
- What Order?
11. Our findings on the above points are as under:
Point No. 1: Negative.
Point No. 2: Negative.
Point No. 3: As per the final Order
R E A S O N S
12. Point No.1 & 2:- The points are taken together to avoid the repetition of facts.
13. On careful perusal of the materials placed before us, case remanded for fresh disposal with a direction take affidavit evidence of all complainants. PW-1 has filed affidavit and reiterated contents of complaint. PW-1 has stated that, Complainants are resident of Jakkali village of Ron Taluk Dist:Gadag. They have grown Greengram and Onion for the year 2004-05 in Kharif season and paid the premium amount as shown in the schedule through OP No.2. Due to shortage of rain, complainants have suffered loss. Inspite of repeated request to Ops, they did not settle the claim. So, Ops have committed the deficiency of service.
14. Ex.C-1 to Ex.72 are documents not disputed by the Ops. In written version OP No.1 specifically stated that, there was no shortfall as per the yield data furnished by the Director of Economics and Statistics for crops. So, there is no deficiency of service committed by the OP No.1. As per Assessed yield in respect of Kharif season 2004-05 issued by statistical department for Onion of Naregal Hobli, Threshold yield is 1465 KG/per Hect, Assessed yield is 2778 and shortfall is NIL and for Greengram Threshold yield is 84 KG/per Hect. Assessed yield is 212 KG/per Hect,. Therefore, Assessed yield is more than threshold yield. Hence, the shortfall is NIL.
15. Complainants claiming compensation for the loss of crops for the year 2004-05 and complaint filed after 3 years in the year 2008. Mere allegation made in the complaint without producing documentary evidence to show that there is a shortfall and not settled the claim, complainants are not entitled the relief.
16. For the above, complainants have failed to prove that OPs have committed deficiency of service and they are entitled for the reliefs. Accordingly, we answer Point No.1 and 2 in Negative.
17. POINT NO. 3: In the result, we pass the following:
//O R D E R//
The complaint filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is dismissed.No order as to costs.
Amount transferred from State Commission, deposited by OP No.1 is ordered to return to OP No.1 after appeal period.
Office is directed to send the copies of this order to the parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 16th day of November- 2022)
(Shri Raju N. Metri) (Shri. D.Y. Basapur) (Smt.Yashoda Bhaskar. Patil)
MEMBER PRESIDENT WOMAN MEMBER
-: ANNEXURE :-
EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT/S:
PW-1: Vijayakumar Jnanajeeva Doddameti
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT/S
Ex.C-1 : Proposal form.
Ex.C-2: Certificate issued by village accountant
Ex.C-3 to 5: RTCs
Ex.C-6 : Proposal forms.
Ex.C-7: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-8 & 9 :RTCs
Ex.C-10:Proposal form.
Ex.C-11: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-12: Proposal form.
Ex.C-13: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-14 to 16: RTCs
Ex.C-17: Proposal form.
Ex.C-18: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-19:RTC
Ex.C-20:Proposal form.
Ex.C-21: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-22 & 23:RTCs
Ex.C-24: Proposal form.
Ex.C-25: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-26 to 29: RTCs
Ex.C-30: Proposal form.
Ex.C-31: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-32: RTC
Ex.C-33:Proposal form.
Ex.C-34: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-35 & 36 : RTCs
Ex.C-37: Proposal form.
Ex.C-38 : Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-39: Proposal form.
Ex.C-40: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-41 & 42: RTCs
Ex.C-43 : Proposal form.
Ex.C-44: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-45 to 47:RTCs
Ex.C-48: Proposal form.
Ex.C-49: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-50:RTC
Ex.C-51:Proposal form.
Ex.C-52: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-53 & 54: RTCs
Ex.C-55:Proposal form.
Ex.C-56: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-57 to 61:RTCs
Ex.C-62:Proposal form.
Ex.C-63 & 64:RTCs
Ex.C-65: Proposal form.
Ex.C-66: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-67: RTC
Ex.C-68:Proposal form.
Ex.C-69: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.C-70:RTC
Ex.C-71:Letter from Dist. Statistical Officer Gadag dtd:20.10.2012.
Ex.C-72:Letter from Joint Director of Crop Insurance Bangalore
dtd:03.11.2009.
EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF OPs:
NIL
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF OPs:
NIL
(Shri Raju N. Metri) (Shri. D.Y. Basapur) (Smt.Yashoda Bhaskar. Patil)
MEMBER PRESIDENT WOMAN MEMBER
