BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 208 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 21.09.2020.
Date of Decision : 23.11.2023.
Ranjeet Singh son of Surja Ram, resident of village Nathusari Kalan, Tehsil Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. HDFC Bank Limited through its Branch Manager, Branch Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa, District Sirsa, Haryana.
2. The Agriculture Insurance Company of India Limited, through its authorized person Plate B & C, 5th Floor, Office Block 1, East Kidwai Nagar, Opposite AIIMS Gate 2, New Delhi.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA………………….MEMBER
Present: Sh. Mukesh Kashnia, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Ravinder Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER:-
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is a farmer by profession. He is having a KCC account with op no.1 bearing no. 50200020740951. That complainant is owner in possession of land measuring 09.75 hectare comprised in Khewat No. 146, Khatuni no. 176, Khewat No. 147 Khatuni no. 177 and khewat no. 148 and khatuni no. 178 situated in village Nathusari Khurd, Tehsil Nathusari Chopta, District Sursa as per jamabandi for the year 2017-2018. It is further averred that on 14.07.2019 op no.1 deducted premium amount of Rs.14,937/- for insurance of his cotton crop of kharif, 2019 in above said land as per notification of Government of India under Prime Minister Fasam Beema Yojna and op no.1 also told him that premium has been debited with op no.2. That cotton crop of complainant of kharif, 2019 was damaged and other farmers have already received insurance claim at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per acre but complainant did not receive any insurance claim as op no.1 wrongly entered the village name as Sirsa (rural) on the portal. That due to negligence and deficiency in service of the ops the complainant has not received claim. The complainant is wholly dependent upon agricultural income. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written version submitting therein that bank has debited the amount of Rs.14,937/- from the account of complainant and has credited the same to the account of op no.2 as premium of insurance. All the information required by op no.2 including Annexure C was sent to the insurance company as per rules. The op no.2 has never informed the complainant or the bank regarding any discrepancy in the record or information sent by the bank. Till date, the answering op has no knowledge that on what ground, the claim has been rejected by the company. The amount of premium paid to op no.2 has never been refunded to answering op or to the complainant. As per clause 18 (xxi) of Haryana Government notification dated 15.07.2020, no objection by the insurance company at a later stage will be entertained and it will be binding on the insurance company to pay the claim. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and for want of knowledge and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 also filed written version submitting therein that as per NCI portal coverage the crop of complainant in village Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa was never got insured with the answering op during the above mentioned season. Therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any claim for the loss of crop in village Nathusari Chopta from insurance company. It is further submitted that cotton crop of complainant in village Sirsa (Rural) (81), Sirsa is insured on the NCI-portal and this answering op has already settled claims with regard to insured crop as per NCIP coverage and has paid an amount of Rs.16,137.25 to the complainant on 15.04.2020 and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5.
6. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Gagan Pal Singh, Assistant Manager as Ex.R1 and statement of account Ex.R2. OP no.2 also tendered affidavit of Sh. Jaspal Singh Khurmi as Ex.R1 and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R12.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
8. It is proved on record from copy of jamabandi for the year 2017-2018 Ex.C2 that complainant is having his agricultural land in village Nathusari Khurd, District Sirsa whereas op no.1 bank at the time of uploading the data of complainant farmer on National Insurance Crop Portal shown/ uploaded the land of complainant in village Sirsa (Rural) which fact is proved from documents Ex.R11 and portal entry Ex.R12 placed on file by op no.2 insurance company. The op no.2 insurance company accordingly has paid insurance claim amount of Rs.16,137.25 to the complainant on the basis of entry of his land in village Sirsa (Rural). However, as per report of Department of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Haryana, Panchkula placed on file, the claim of Rs.7247.84 per acre was paid to the farmers of village Nathusari Khurd for the loss of cotton in kharif, 2019. Since complainant is having his 09.75 hectares (24 acres) of land in village Nathusari Khurd, therefore, complainant was also entitled to receive insurance claim amount at the rate of Rs.7247.84 per acre. As such complainant was entitled to insurance claim amount of Rs.1,73,948/- for the loss of his cotton crop in 24 acres of land situated in village Nathusari Khurd in kharif, 2019. Therefore, complainant is entitled to remaining claim amount of Rs.1,57,810/- from op no.1 bank for the above said mistake committed by op no.1 bank after deduction of the amount of Rs.16,137.25/- which has already been paid by op no.2 insurance company. In this regard clause 17.2 of the operational guidelines of PMFBY stipulates that in cases where farmers are denied crop insurance due to incorrect/ partial/ non-uploading of their details on Portal, concerned banks/ intermediaries shall be responsible for payment of claims to them. In this regard the Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as State Bank of India versus Bijender Singh and others RP No. 1777 of 2023 decided on 17.10.2023 relied upon by learned counsel for complainant has also held that “In view of the aforesaid guidelines governing the insurance scheme in question, the liability to satisfy the claim would undeniably fall upon the petitioner-bank, since it had wrongly remitted the premium for any entirely different area, which was far-away and totally different from the land of complainants, where the damage had taken place”.
9. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint qua opposite party no.1 bank and direct op no.1 to pay the remaining claim amount of Rs.1,57,810/- to the complainant for the loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2019 in land situated in village Nathusari Khurd within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be entitled to receive the said amount of Rs.1,57,810/- from op no.1 bank alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of this order till actual realization. We also direct the op no.1 bank to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above stipulated period. However, complaint qua op no.2 insurance company stands dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 23.11.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
