DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, | Behind Tahasildar Office, Basaveshwar Nagar, GADAG |
|
| |
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.613/2008 DISPOSED ON 19th 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. 16. 17. 18. 19. | Sharanappa Hanamappa Jotrannavar, Age: 40 Yrs., Hanamappa Basappa Ibrampur, (Dead) Mallikarjun Basappa Madiwalar, Age: 30 Yrs., Veeranna Basavanneppa Angadi, Age: 35 Yrs., Prashant Basappa Wagganavar Minor guardian mother Smt.Gangawwa W/o Basappa Wagganavar, Age: 44 Yrs., Santosh Basappa Wagganavar, Age: 25 Yrs., Malleshappa Shanmukhappa Angadi, Age: 48 Yrs., Maruti Sannappa Magundanavar, Age: 44 Yrs., Umesh Madevappa Madiwalar, Age: 43 Yrs., Mallikarjunagouda Sangadanagouda Mandalageri, Age: 35 Yrs., Govindappa Ningappa Giremani, Age: 60 Yrs., Shivappa Adiweppa Kareddi, Age: 22 Yrs., Sahadevappa Ningappa Wagganavar, Age: 45 Yrs., Mallikarjun Basappa Wagganavar, (Dead) Sharanappa Basappa Wagganavar, Age: 35 Yrs., Mahesh Basappa Wagganavar, Age: 30 Yrs., Somappa Devappa Agasimani, Age: 25 Yrs., Bheemappa Kariyappa Gawarwad, Age: 60 Yrs., Veerabhadrappa Shanmukhappa Angadi, Age: 50 Yrs., All Complainants are R/o: Balaganur Village, Tq:Gadag Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.S.C.Hosamani, Adv.) |
| | |
V/s
Respondents :- | 1.
2. 3. | The Officer Incharge/ Regional Manager, 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 Government of Karnataka Through its District Commissioner, Gadag District Gadag. (Rep. by DGP, Gadag) The Manager, Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank Balaganur Tq:Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.N.S.Bichagatt, Advocate) |
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SRI. D.Y. BASAPUR, PRESIDENT
The complainants have filed the complaint U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for recovery of crop insurance amount of Rs.3,75,089/- with an interest @ 12% p.a, towards mental agony of Rs.10,000/- to each complainant and cost of the proceedings.
1. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
Complainants are resident of Balaganur village of Gadag Taluk Dist:Gadag. They had sown Onion, Cotton, Bengalgram, Wheat, Jowar and Sunflower for the year 2006-07 in Rabi season and paid the premium amount as shown in the schedule through OP No.3. 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 appeared through counsel and OP No.2 appeared through DGP. Op No.3 appeared through counsel. 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 2006-07 in Rabi season. As per the yield data furnished by the Director of Economics and Statistics, there was no shortfall for the crops Onion, Cotton, Bengalgram, Wheat, Jowar and Sunflower of Betageri Hobli. So, there is no deficiency of service committed by this OP. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The brief facts of the written version filed by OP No.2 are as under:
OP No.2 denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the year 2006-07 in Rabi season. Complainants are not a consumer to this OP and they are only having supervising power over the other Ops. So, there is no deficiency of service. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
5. The brief facts of written version filed by OP No.3 are as under:
OP No.3 have denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the Rabi season 2006-07. OP No.3 stated that, they are acting as a 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.3. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
6. After hearing, my predecessor, passed common judgment on 20.02.2008 and awarded compensation. OP No.1 has challenged the judgment before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru, in Appeal No.1991/09, the same came to be dismissed on 02.11.2009. Op No.1 has preferred R.P No.2393-2394/2008 before Hon’ble National Commission, and same came to be allowed and remanded for fresh disposal.
7. After receipt of the records, notices were issued to the parties. After hearing, my predecessor, again passed common judgment on 31.05.2010 and awarded compensation. Being aggrieved by the judgment, OP No.1 has again preferred an Appeal No.2657/10 before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore and the same came to be allowed on 28.10.2010 and remanded for fresh disposal.
8. After receipt of the records, notices were issued to the parties. After hearing, my predecessor, again passed common judgment on 21.05.2016 and awarded compensation. Being aggrieved by the judgment, OP No.1 again preferred an Appeal No.1439/16 before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore and the same came to be allowed on 12.06.2009 and remanded for fresh disposal.
9. After receipt of the records, notices were issued to the parties. Complainant No.1,4,6,8,9,10,12,13,15,16,18,19 and Ops. Complainant No.3,5,7,11 & 17 are reported as addressee left. Complainant No.2 & 14 are reported as dead no LRs brought on record. Complainant No.14 filed affidavit and examined as PW-1 and marked the documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-45. KVK, Adv. undertakes to file power for OP No.1. DGP filed M/A for OP No.2 and written version. NSB, Adv filed power for OP No.3. Ops have not chosen to file affidavit evidence and documents were marked as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.Op-42.
10. OP No.1 filed the written arguments. No argument advanced for complainants and Op No.1. NSB, Adv. for Op No.3 and DGP for Op No.2 argued.
11. 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?
12. 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
13. Point No.1 & 2:- The points are taken together to avoid the repetition of facts.
14. 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 affidavits and reiterated contents of complaint. PW-1 has stated that, Complainants are resident of Balaganur village of Gadag Taluk Dist:Gadag. They had sown Onion, Cotton, Bengalgram, Wheat, Jowar and Sunflower for the year 2006-07 in Rabi season and paid the premium amount as shown in the schedule through OP No.3. 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.
15. Ex.C-1 to Ex.C- 45 RTCs and other documents and Ex.Op-1 Ex.Op-2 are not disputed by the Ops. Main contention of Op No.1 is that there was a no shortfall as per yield data report issued by statistical department. In the written version filed by Op No.1 shown that for Greengram(RF) Threshold yield is 174 Assessed yield is 118 and shortfall is NIL. for Wheat(RF) Threshold yield is 164 Assessed yield is 335 and shortfall is NIL. for Jowar(RF) Threshold yield is 162 Assessed yield is 399 and shortfall is NIL. And for Sunflower (RF) Threshold yield is 207 Assessed yield is 255 and shortfall is NIL. for the year 2006-07 for Rabi season of Betageri Hobli and there is no shortfall.
16. Even no cause of action arose to file this complaint, as there is no deficiency of service committed by Ops. Complainants claiming compensation for the loss of crops for the year 2006-07 and complaint filed after 2 years in the year 2008. Without proving the case with affidavit evidence and documents, complainants are not entitled the reliefs. Mere allegation made in the complaint, without producing documentary evidence to show that there is a shortfall. 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.
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 Commission on this 19th 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: Mallikarjun Basappa Wagganavar,
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT/S
Ex.C-1:Postal acknowledgment.
Ex.C-2: Legal notice.
Ex.C-3: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-4: RTC.
Ex.C-5: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-6:RTC.
Ex.C-7: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-8:RTC.
Ex.C-9: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-10:RTC.
Ex.C-11: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-12:RTC.
Ex.C-13: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-14: RTC.
Ex.C-15: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-16:RTC
Ex.C-17: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-18:RTC.
Ex.C-19: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-20:RTC.
Ex.C-21: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-22: RTC.
Ex.C-23: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-24 & 25: RTCs.
Ex.C-26: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-27: RTC.
Ex.C-28: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-29 to 32: RTCs.
Ex.C-33: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-34: RTC.
Ex.C-35: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-36 &n 37:RTCs
Ex.C-38: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-39: RTC.
Ex.C-40: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-41: RTC.
Ex.C-42: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-43: RTC.
Ex.C-44: Certificate issued Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank.
Ex.C-45:RTC.
EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF OPs:
NIL
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF OPs:
Ex.OP-1: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-2: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-3: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-4: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-5: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-6: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-7: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-8: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-9:Proposal form.
Ex.Op-10: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-11: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-12: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-13:Proposal form.
Ex.Op-14: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-15: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-16: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-17: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-18: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-19: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-20: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.Op-21:Proposal form.
Ex.Op-22: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.OP-23: Proposal form.
Ex.Op-24: Certificate issued by village accountant
Ex.Op-25 to 42: Crop Insurance Statements.
(Shri Raju N. Metri) (Shri. D.Y. Basapur) (Smt.Yashoda Bhaskar. Patil)
MEMBER PRESIDENT WOMAN MEMBER
