IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 19th day of June 2023
Present: Sri.Manulal.V.S, President
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member
Sri.K.M.Anto, Member
CC No. 28/2021 (Filed on 02/02/2021)
Complainant : R.Sreenivasan,
Thoompumkal Veedu,
Pulikkutisserry P.O,
Aimanam, Kottayam - 686 015.
Vs.
Opposite parties : (1) Vegetable & Fruits Promotion Council Keralam,
Cochin Divisional Office - 3,
A.C City, Janatha Junction,
Vytila, Cochin - 682 019.
(By Advs: Anupa Kurian &
Vivek Mathew Varkey)
(2) National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Divisional Office,
A.C Estate, Janatha Junction,
Vytila, Cochin - 682 019.
(By Adv: C.J. Jomi)
(3) Laily,
Vegetable & Fruits Promotion Council Kerala,
Cochin Divisional Office,
A.C City Janatha Junction,
Vytila, Cochin – 682 019.
(By Adv: Anupa Kurian)
(4) Rosy,
Vegetable & Fruits Promotion Council Kerala,
Pulikkutisserry Vipani,
Pulikkutisserry P.O,
Aimanam, Kottayam - 686 015.
(By Advs: Anupa Kurian &
Vivek Mathew Varkey)
O R D E R
Sri.K.M. ANTO, MEMBER
The complainant planted 500 banana plants on 08/02/2019 in his property. The banana plants were insured through the fourth opposite party by remitting Rs. 1,500/- as premium. The banana plants which were borne fruit were damaged after one month due to the flood in 2019. The loss of crop was reported to VFPCK. The third and fourth opposite parties came to inspect the loss of crop, but they declined to conduct the inspection alleging that the area was water logged. The complainant had spent about Rs.30,000/- for planting the banana plants. The opposite parties failed to provide the insurance amount to the complainant. If the banana plants were not destroyed in the flood, the complainant might have received Rs.50,000/-. This complaint is filed for getting Rs.50,000/-as compensation, Rs.1,500/- the amount paid as premium and Rs.3,000/- as litigation cost.
On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite parties. The first, third and fourth opposite parties appeared and filed joint version. The second opposite party filed separate version.
The version of the first, third and fourth opposite party is as follows. The fourth opposite party had no relationship with the first opposite party. Even though the complainant had cultivated the banana plants, the averment that the
banana plants have borne fruit and got damaged in the flood were false. On the petition of the complainant, the third opposite party had conducted the field verification and found that these plantains were not borne fruit and were not damaged in the flood. There was no loss to the complainant. Photographs were taken during field verification. Since it was revealed in the field verification that no damages had occurred to the plantains, the claim of the complainant was not forwarded. Out of the 18 applications received 14 applications were forwarded and paid the damages. On getting information regarding the loss of crops and if the number of banana plants were less than 300, the loss is ascertained on field verification. If the loss of plants were more than 300, the surveyor of the insurance company will conduct the inspection to determine the loss and will give the claim as per the report of the Surveyor. There was no loss or damages to the complainant.
The version of the second opposite party is that the second opposite party had not received any claim form or information from the complainant regarding the loss of his plantain. There is no employer working in the office of the second opposite party as shown as the third opposite party. The second opposite party had not sent any officer for the inspection of the crop of the complainant. Since no claim form is submitted before the second opposite party, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the second opposite party. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the second opposite party.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Exhibits A1 and A2. The complainant was examined as PW1. Anupama, Deputy Manager of the first opposite party filed the proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked documents as Exhibits B1 and B2.
On the basis of the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced we would like to consider the following points.
(1) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and (2) If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
POINTS 1 & 2 :
On going through the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced it is clear that the complainant had planted banana plants on 08/02/2019 in 1.5 acres of his property. The complainant had availed crop insurance vide policy No.570400/47 of the crop insurance scheme introduced by the first and second opposite parties. The complainant had paid Rs.1,500/- as premium and the policy period was from 30/03/2019 to 29/03/2020.
Ext.A1 is the copy of the Insurance Certificate availed by the complainant for 500 banana plants vide No.570400/47 for the period from 30/03/2019 to 29/03/2020.
Ext.B2 is the copy of the Master agreement for banana, vegetable and Tuber crop Insurance for participating farmers of Vegetable and Fruit Promotion Council, Kerala entered between the first and second opposite parties on 27/07/2020. The policy period of the complainant was from 30/03/2019 to 29/03/2020. Ext. B2 is executed after the claim period of the complainant.
The 1st, 3rd and 4th opposite parties in the version and in the chief examination affirm that the third opposite party had conducted field verification on the petition of the complainant to assess the crop loss. In the field verification it was found that even though the complainant had planted some banana plants, that plants were not borne fruit and was not damaged in the flood. Accordingly, the field verification report was not forwarded to the second opposite party.
Moreover the opposite parties submitted that they have received 18 applications for crop loss in the flood and compensation was given to 14 farmers. This proves that there was crop loss due to flood under the area covered by the first opposite party.
The 1st, 3rd and 4th opposite parties failed to produce the field verification report even before the Commission. This proves that the third opposite party who had visited the farm of the complainant upon intimation by the complainant, failed to prepare the field verification report and to forward the field verification report to the second opposite party. Since the field verification report was not forwarded by the Ist and 3rd opposite parties, the second opposite party was not able to process the insurance claim of the complainant.
The first and third opposite parties are bound to forward the field verification report to the second opposite party. This act on the part of the first and third opposite parties is clearly deficiency in their service. The first and third opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant for this deficient act.
Even though the complainant claimed that he had spent Rs. 30,000/- for planting the banana plants, no documentary evidence is produced to establish this claim. On the basis of above discussed findings, we allow the complaint and pass the following orders.
The first and third opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as compensation for the deficiency in service on their part with cost Rs. 2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand only) to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the compensation amount will carry 9% interest from the date of this order till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 19th day of June, 2023
Sri.K.M.Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri.Manulal.V.S, President Sd/-
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member Sd/-
APPENDIX :
Witness from the side of the Complainant :
PW1 - R. Sreenivasan
Witness from the side of Opposite Parties :
Nil
Exhibits from the side of the Complainant :
Ext.A1 - Copy of Insurance Certificate
Ext.A2 - Photographs
Exhibits from the side of Opposite parties :
Ext.B1 - Photographs
Ext.B2 - Copy of Master agreement for Banana, Vegetable and Tuber crop
Insurance dated 27/07/2020 between the first and second
opposite parties
Ext.C1 - Commission Report
By Order,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
