For the Complainant:  Self .

       For the O.P 1:  P.C .Bhoi . Chie Executive , Thuapadar PACS Ltd. 

       For the O.P 2:   Not Appeared.

       For the O.P 3 : Sri.Preomod Kumar Sahu, Deputy Register of C.S ,Kalahandi Division.

       For the O.P4:-Not Appeared  

       For the O.P 5 : Self ,

       For  the O.P 6 : Shri P.K.Bhoi,Advocate

      For  the O.P 7 : Smt. Pratikshya Mishra ,I/C AGM BCCB Ltd, Kalahandi.  

ORDER

 Sri A.K.Patra, President

1. Both parties remain absent consistently on the date fixed for hearing. Hence, in view of Section 38(3) of C.P.Act 2019 case record is taken up to decide on merits.
2. Perused the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the contention of both the parties & documents placed on the record. .
3. The captioned Consumer Complaint is filed by the complainant named above inter alia alleging negligence & deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties for non release of crop insurance benefit under Pradhan Mantri Fasala Bima Yojana (PMFBY) towards loss of paddy crops grown in Kharif 2022-23 .
4. The complainant seeks for an order directing the Ops to release the   crops insurance benefit under PMFBY and further prays for all other reliefs as the Commission may deem think fit & proper.
5.  The factual matrix leading to the case of the complainant as emerged from the case record is that, complainant is a farmer by occupation. During Kharif  season 2022-23 he  had cultivated paddy  crop over his agriculture land of  Mouza/village Thuapadar taking agriculture loan from the op 1/ Thupadar PACS Ltd  and got the crops insured with AIC/OP6  under PMFBY contributing insurance premium @ 2% of sanctioned Loan .  It is further submits that, said insured paddy   crop grown in Kharif 2022  got damaged  accordingly co-farmers have already received their insurance benefits but no insurance benefit is released to the complainant due to negligence & deficient service of Ops which caused financial loss & mental agony to the complainant . Hence, this complaint.
6. On being notice, the OP1/ the Executive Officer ,Thupadar PACS Ltd  filed their written version admitting the facts that , the complainant has availed one Agriculture loan from Thupadar PACS Ltd  vide KCC No. 121400256   to the tune of Rs. 42,000/- against land pertaining to Khata No. 557  of Mouza/village Thuapadar  under Thupadar GP of  PS/Tahasil- -Bhawanipatna  Sadar ,Dist-Kalahandi. And in the said loan a sum of Rs. 840/- i.e @ 2% of the loan amount is being deducted towards the premium  for crops insurance under PMFBY for Kharif 2022  and that, said crops insurance premium is remitted to the Agriculture Insurance Company of India /OP 6 through the BCCB Ltd Bhawanipatna/Op 7 after completion of all formalities and,  accordingly Policy No. 43060504   is issued in favour of the complainant by the Insurance Company . It is also admitted that, Govt. of Odisha has declared crops damage @ 24% in the Thuapadar  GP  for the Kharif Seasion 2022 .Accordingly, the AIC/OP6  is duty bound to release  insurance benefit to the account of the insured farmer/complainant directly but there is no insurance benefit release to the Thuapadar PACS Ltd. It is further submitted that, there is no negligence or deficient service on the part of Thuapadar PACS Ltd. Hence complaint be dismissed with cost.
7. The Op 2 has neither appeared nor filed their written version.
8. The Op 3/ State of Odisha represented through the Collector, Kalahandi has filed their writing version by the hand of Sri. Promod Kumar Sahu, Deputy Register of C.S ,Kalahandi Division which contents that ,the Insurance Company has received the premium and the insurance company is solely responsible to release the insurance benefit to the insured farmer’s bank  account directly on declaration of  crops damage in  particular G.P. And that, the crop Insurance under PMFBY is being performed under the Bhawanipatna Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd.(BCCB Ltd) is duty bound to ensure release of insurance benefit to the loanee insured farmers/complainant  . As  per the report of the Chief Executive Officer ,BCCB the entitlement  of crops insurance benefit of Rs. 10195.93 has already not been released by the Agriculture Insurance Company of India /AIC to the Bank account of the complainant there with Bank Of India on Adhar Base transation  having last four digit of Adhar No.xxx-xxxx-7416 on 14.12.2023 .The Op 3 has filed details of transferred of crops insurance benefit for perusal. 
9. The Chief District Agriculture Officer/Op5 for himself & representing the Op 4 submits their written version vide letter no. 7841 /Agril,  Dt. 01/06/24   admitting the facts that, during Kharif 2022 Thuapadar  GP of Bhawanipatna Block was declared 24.27%  short fall yield.  The details parameters as provided by AIC are as follows:_ Threshold Yield: 2451, Actual Yield: 1856, Short fall Yield: 595 .
10. The Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd /OP 6 appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri P.K.Bhoi but failed to filed their written version within the time as prescribed under C.P.Act 2019 . Written version filed on belated stage has not taken in to consideration in view of order dt.04/03/2020 passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in New India Assurance Co.Ltd vrs. Hilly Multipurpose Cold Strage Ltd. Howevr, Op 6 is allowed to take part in the hearing of this case without written version.
11. The Op 7/BCCB Ltd through its Chief Executive Officer Ms.Banalata Dhal   filed their written version corroborating the facts stated there in the written version of Op 1/Thuapadar PACS Ltd & Op3 . It is stated that, on examination it has reveled on concerned portal that the crop insurance benefit of of Rs. 10195.93 has already been released to the complainant by the AIC/op6 on 14/12/2023 and there is no claim remain unreleased as on date.
12. Sec.38(6) of C.P.Act,2019 casts an obligation on the District Commission to decide a complaint on the basis of the evidence brought to its notice by the complainant and the service provider irrespective of whether  the service provider adduced evidence or not, the decision of the District Commission has to be based on evidence relied upon by the complainant.
13. Law is well settled that, complainant is to prove deficiency in service as alleged against the Ops but here, in this case, no cogent evidence is adduced by the complainant to prove negligence or deficient service there on the part of the Ops.   Rather, the contentions of Op 3 & 7 that, the entitlement of crops insurance benefit of Rs. 10195.93 has already not been released by the Agriculture Insurance Company of India /AIC to the Bank account of the complainant there through Adhar base transition having last four digit of Adhar No.xxx-xxxx-7416 on 14.12.2023 and there is no claim remain unreleased as on date remain undisputed.
14. Based on above facts & circumstances and settled principle of law, we are of the opinion that, this complaint sans merits. Hence, this consumer complaint is dismissed against the OPs on contest. However, no order as to cost.

Dictated and corrected by me

  SD/-     

President

                   I   agree.

                                                     SD/-

                                                   Member                                    

 Pronounced in open Commissi on today on this   27^th `November  2024  under the seal and signature of this Commission. The pending application if any is also disposed off accordingly.

 Free copy of this order be supplied to the parties for their perusal or party may download the same from the Confonet be treated as copy served to the parties. Complaint is disposed of accordingly