BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 683 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 28.11.2019.
Date of Decision : 28.11.2023.
Parbhu Singh, aged about 56 years son of Shri Bhader Singh, resident of village Kagdana, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. 4th Floor, the Statement Building, Plot No. 149, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Next to Hometel Hotel, Chandigarh- 160002 through its Manager.
2. Punjab National Bank, Branch Village Darba Kalan, District Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
3. Deputy Director Agriculture, Sirsa, District Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as amended 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. Robin Mehta, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. R.K. Mehta, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
Sh. Satish Kumar, Statistical Assistant for opposite party no.3.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that he is an agriculturist having agricultural land in joint share comprised in Khewat No. 187, Khatuni No. 220, 221, 222, Khewat No. 296 Khatuni No. 415, Khewat No.45, Khatuni No. 51, Khewat No.45, Khatuni No. 52, 53, Khewat No. 46 Khatuni No. 54 situated in village Kagdana, Tehsil and District Sirsa as per jamabandi for the year 2012-2013. He is wholly dependent upon agricultural income in all respects. That complainant is having his account bearing No. 1350008800000177 with op no.2 and has availed crop loan facility from op no.2 by mortgaging his 85 kanals land with op no.2. It is further averred that on 30.12.2017 premium amount of Rs.1836.26 was deducted by op no.2 from the account of complainant by op no.2 and was transferred to op no.1 for insurance of his crop under Prime Minister Fasal Beema Yojna. That before the rabi crop of 2017-2018, the complainant had sown cotton crop in about 85 kanals of land in kharif season, 2017 which was damaged due to disaster of white bees and other natural calamities and complainant is entitled to insurance amount of Rs.,4,00,000/- approximately at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre. That later on complainant came to know that bank has not deducted the insurance amount for cotton crop which is automatically deducted by op bank without consent or intimation to the complainant and so the insurance amount for his damaged cotton crop has not been paid to him. It is further averred that complainant was under impression that his premium amount for cotton crop of kharif season 2017 was deducted by the bank as usual. The matter was reported to op no.3 for necessary action but no action was taken. The complainant also approached the ops and repeatedly requested them to release the insurance claim but all in vain and despite all efforts made by complainant to get insurance claim, the ops are adamant not to release the insurance amount and have caused deficiency in serviced, unnecessary harassment and mental agony to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, opposite parties appeared. Op no.1 filed written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that every farmer who wants to get the benefits of KCC then he should have compulsorily get the insurance under the scheme and that there is no deficiency in service on the part of op no.1 and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 also filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that during the season of Kharif, 2017, the officials of answering op contacted the complainant and requested him to provide all the relevant documents for insurance of his crops for kharif, 2017 which was required to the insurance company for KYC but the complainant did not provide the necessary documents for the purpose of insurance of crop of complainant. Later on, the complainant denied for insurance of his crops of kharif, 2017, so the premium of insurance was not deducted from the account of complainant and his crop was not insured. It is further submitted that after that he provided aadhar card and other documents for KYC to the bank officials, so his crop of rabi 2018 was insured. So, the complainant is not entitled for any insurance claim from answering op. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. Op no.3 also filed written statement submitting therein that only crop cutting experience report/ report of survey of loss of crop is to be prepared by answering op and all other risks of coverage were to be finalized by insurance company and there is no role of answering op in this regard and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.3 made.
6. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C4.
7 Op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Raman Kumar, Branch Manager as Ex.R1. Op no.3 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Babu Lal, Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sirsa as Ex.R2 and documents Ex.R3 to Ex.R5. OP no.1 did not lead any evidence despite availing several opportunities.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, Sh. Satish Kumar, SA for op no.3 and have gone through the case file carefully.
9. The op no.2 bank has asserted that complainant denied for insurance of his crop of kharif, 2017, so the premium of insurance was not deducted from the account of complainant and his crop of kharif, 2017 was not insured. However, the op no.2 bank has not proved on record through any cogent and convincing evidence that complainant himself denied for insurance of his cotton crop of kharif, 2017. If the complainant was not willing for insurance of his cotton crop of kharif, 2017, the bank should have obtained his option/ consent in this regard on the prescribed form but op no.2 has failed to do so. Moreover, the insurance of crops of loanee farmers was mandatory as per Prime Minister Fasal Beema Yojna and bank has to compulsorily insure the crops of loanee farmers. Since there is nothing on file to prove that complainant himself denied for insurance of his cotton crop of kharif, 2017, so op no.2 bank is deficient in service for not insuring the cotton crop of kharif, 2017. In so far as loss to the cotton crop of kharif, 2017 of complainant is concerned, though complainant has claimed insurance claim amount at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre on the basis of total loss but the agriculture department op no.3 which is liable to prepare loss report has placed on file village wise tabulation sheet of sum insured and claim under PMFBY during Kharif, 2017 as Ex.R4 according to which the average yield of cotton crop of kharif, 2017 in village Kagdana was 346.96 Kgs. per hectare and average yield of block was 355.26 Kgs. per hectare and as the average yield of village was less than block to some extent only, therefore, there was slight loss to the crop of complainant in kharif, 2017 and not total loss to the cotton crop of complainant. As per formula given in the operational guidelines of PMFBY, the complainant is entitled to insurance claim amount of Rs.6932/- from op no.2 bank only. However, there is no liability of any kind of ops no.1 and 3.
10 In view of our above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint against op no.2 bank and direct the op no.2 bank to pay the claim amount of Rs.6932/- to the complainant 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.6932/- from op no.2 bank alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment. We also direct the op no.2 bank to further pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. However, complaint qua ops no.1 and 3 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: 28.11.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
