DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, | Behind Tahasildar Office, Basaveshwar Nagar, GADAG |
|
| |
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.115/2008 DISPOSED ON 15th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 |
|
|
| |
BEFORE: | | | HON'BLE MR. D.Y. BASAPUR, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) PRESIDENT | | HON'BLE Mrs. YASHODA BHASKAR PATIL, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) M.Ed., WOMAN MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. RAJU. N. METRI, B.Com, L.L.B(Spl.,) MEMBER |
|
Complainants :- | 1 2 3 | Ravindranath Jambunath Doddameti Age:Major Occ:Agril. Shivanagappa Jambunath Doddameti Age:Major, Occ:Agril. Solabappa Veerupakashappa Mugli Age:Major Occ:Agril. All complainants are Occ:Agril R/o Jakkali Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.C.B.Koppad, Adv.) |
V/s
Respondents :- | 1.
2. 3. | Managing Director, 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, Central Bank of India Branch:Naregall Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag. (Rep. by Sri.D.K.Deshpande, Advocate) The State of Karnataka Represented by Deputy Commissioner, Gadag. (Rep. by DGP, Gadag) |
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.26,656.00/- with interest 12% p.a., Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and cost of the complaint.
1. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
Complainants are resident of Jakkali village Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag and they have grown Groundnut and Greengram 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. DGP appeared for OP No.3. 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 crop of Groundnut and Greengram during the Kharif seasons 2004-05. As per the yield data furnished by the Director of Economics and Statistics, there was no shortfall to the said crops in Kharif season. So no deficiency of service committed by Op No.1. 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 has denied the various allegations and contended that, complainants have claimed for the loss of their crops during the Rabi season 2004-05. OP No.2 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 from complainants 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 crop during the Kharif season 2004-05. OP No.3 is not a consumer as only supervising power over the other Ops. So there is no deficiency of service. Hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
6. After hearing, my predecessors passed common judgment on 01.12.2008 and awarded compensation. OP No.1 has challenged the judgment in Appeal No.1715/09 before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, the same came to be allowed on 10.09.2009 and remanded for fresh disposal.
7. After hearing, my predecessors passed judgment on 23.03.2010 and awarded compensation. OP No.1 has challenged the judgment in Appeal No.1641/10 before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, the same came to be allowed on 30.09.2010 and remanded for fresh disposal.
8. After hearing, my predecessors passed judgment on 06.01.2016 and awarded compensation. OP No.1 has challenged the judgment in Appeal No.479/16 before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, the same came to be allowed on 03.02.2010 and remanded for fresh disposal.
9. After receipt of the records, notice issued to the parties. Notice served to complainant No.1, 2,3 and OP No.1 to 3 and they are called out. KVK. Adv. filed power for OP No.1. DGP filed M/A and written version for OP No.3. OP No.2 called out absent. Complainant No.1 filed affidavit and examined as PW-1 and got documents marked as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-10. Ops not chosen to file affidavit evidence and documents were marked as Ex.Op No.1 to Ex.Op-19.
10. OP No.1 filed written arguments. No argument advanced on both side inspite of sufficient time given.
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 filed affidavit and reiterated contents of complaint. PW-1 has stated that, Complainants are resident of Jakkali village Tq:Ron Dist:Gadag and They have grown Groundnut and Greengram 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.
15. Ex.C-1 to C-10 RTCs and other documents are not disputing by the Ops. The main contention of Op No.1 is that there was no shortfall as per yield data report issued by statistical department. In written version stated that, for Greengram (RF) Threshold yield is mentioned as 84 and Assessed yield mentioned as 212 and for Groundnut (RF) Threshold yield is mentioned as 144 and Assessed yield is mentioned as 46. So, there is no shortfall for the both crops. The OP has produced the documents which are marked as Ex.Op No.1 to Ex.OP-19 and all these documents are related to the complainants i.e,. RTC, Proposal forms etc.
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 2004-05 and complaint filed after 3 years in the year 2008. Complainant No. 1, 2 & 3 are remained absent, inspite of service of notice and they have not chosen to file their affidavit evidence. Without proving the case with affidavit evidence and documents, complainants are not entitled the reliefs. Mere allegation made in the complaint without producing oral and documentary evidence, to show that, there is shortfall, and complainants are not entitled.
17. 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.
18. 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 15th 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: Ravindranath Jambunath Doddameti
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT/S
Ex.C-1 to 3: Bank receipts.
Ex.C-4 to 6:RTCs
Ex.C-7: Letter from Dist. Statistical Officer, Gadag dtd:20.10.2012.
Ex.C-8 to 10: Certificate issued by village accountant
EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF OPs:
-NIL-
DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF OPs:
Ex.Op-1 : Proposal form.
Ex.OP-2 & 3 : Form No.24.
Ex.OP-4 : Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.OP-5:RTC
Ex.Op-6: Certificate issued by Bank.
Ex.OP-7& 8: Proposal forms.
Ex.OP-9: Certificate issued by village accountant.
Ex.OP-10:Form No.24.
Ex.OP-11:RTC
Ex.OP-12:Certificate issued by Bank.
Ex.OP-13:Proposal form.
Ex.OP-14& 15: Form No.24.
Ex.Op-16:Proposal form.
Ex.OP-17 & 18:RTCs
Ex.Op-19: Certificate issued by village accountant.
(Shri Raju N. Metri) (Shri. D.Y. Basapur) (Smt.Yashoda Bhaskar. Patil)
MEMBER PRESIDENT WOMAN MEMBER
