BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 386 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 19.07.2019.
Date of Decision : 27.02.2024.
Surjeet Singh deceased through his legal heirs: (i) Vidya Devi (widow) (ii) Rakesh Kumar, (iii) Bansi Lal, (iv) Rajinder Kumar (sons) of deceased Surjeet Singh son of Sh. Dayal Singh, all residents of village Mammerkhera, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Janta Bhawan Road, Sirsa.
2. Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sirsa, Haryana.
3. HDFC Bank Ltd., Janta Bhawan Road, 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
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR …………………MEMBER
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA……………..MEMBER
Present: Sh. Preet Amar, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. Satish Kumar, Statistical Assistant for opposite party no.2.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite party no.3.
ORDER
Initially the present complaint was filed by original complainant Surjeet Singh and after his death his legal heirs have been impleaded on behalf of complainant.
2. In brief, the case of complainant (i.e. Surjeet Singh original complainant) is that he is an agriculturist and is owner of agricultural land and is having his account with op no.3 bearing account No. 50200013003230. That on 31.07.2018 premium amount of Rs.7574/- was deducted by op no.3 from the account of complainant for insurance of crop in 13 acres of land and complainant was assured by op no.3 that amount has been given to op no.1 and his cotton crop is insured at the rate of Rs.18,000/- per acre. It is further averred that in the year 2018 the crop of complainant was completely damaged due to white fly and other natural disaster and op no.2 had visited to the village of complainant and observed that crop of the village is damaged. That complainant also informed about the damages to the ops but to the surprise of complainant the op no.1 stated that amount has not been transferred to them and denied receiving of such payment. It is further averred that thereafter complainant visited to op no.3 for getting the details of premium on which op no.3 stated that premium was refunded back in his account on 10.08.2018 but did not disclose any genuine reason in this regard. That thereafter also complainant visited to ops no.1 and 3 many times for enquiring about the above said amount but they did not disclose anything to the complainant and have also refused to pay the insured amount of Rs.2,34,000/- to the complainant who is a poor farmer and is completely dependent upon agricultural income and in this way they have also caused harassment, financial loss and deficiency in service to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections regarding privity of contract, cause of action, estoppal, maintainability etc. On merits, it is submitted that Govt. notification and operational guidelines of PMFBY are binding upon any individual loanee or non laonee farmer, bank and insurance company, if there is insurance. However, answering op did not receive any premium against this very account number, name of farmer and land mentioned and referred by complainant. The answering op is not concerned with the message. However, if bank had failed to pay the premium of insurance for getting the coverage of insurance of crop of complainant of said village, in that eventuality, answering op cannot be held liable to make payment of any damages, compensation to the complainant and in case of failure to get the insurance coverage by the banker by ensuring the payment of premium with correct data, detail record about name of farmer, crop, village etc. as per operational guidelines on the portal wherefrom the record is taken by insurance company and coverage is done, then only bank is liable. On the portal there is no entry of coverage against the account number of complainant through the bank regarding the crop mentioned in the complaint and as such answering op is not liable to pay any claim/ compensation to the complainant and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 made.
4. Op no.2 also filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that yield basis claims are settled by the insurance company only on completion of other necessary formalities as prescribed in operational guidelines of scheme which have already been given by op no.2 within specific time period and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.2 made.
5. Op no.3 also filed written statement raising preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant is having loan account with answering op. The answering op at the time of advancement of loan to the complainant appraised him about the Fasal Bima Policy launched by Government of India which was mandatory for the KCC account holders but the complainant flatly refused to get his crops insured with any insurance company but due to instructions of the Government as well as norms of the Bank the answering op has got the declared crops of the complainant insured by deducting a sum of Rs.7574/- from the loan account of the complainant which was transferred to the account of op no.1 on 31.07.2018. But noticing about the insurance, the complainant visited the bank on 10.08.2018 who was very much annoyed and he asked the official/ Incharge of the bank why he has debited the insurance premium from his account because he has never authorized him to get his crop insured and to transfer any amount on account of insurance premium to any insurance company. It is further submitted that on the asking of complainant, the answering op appraised the facts of the RBI instructions to the complainant but all in vain. Thereafter, he categorically asked the answering op to get the insurance of the crop of complainant cancelled immediately and to reverse the amount of premium to his account, failing which the answering op shall face the consequences. It is further submitted that keeping in view the circumstances and threat given by complainant, the answering op got cancelled insurance application and reversed the amount of premium charged from the complainant to his account in the presence of complainant himself. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
6. Learned counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9.
7. Learned counsel for op no.1 has tendered in evidence affidavit of Ms. Puja Tapowal Incharge Legal Hub as Ex. RW1/A and documents Ex.R1/1 and Ex. R1/2. OP no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Babu Lal, Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sirsa as Ex. RW2/A and tabulation sheet Ex. RW2/2. Ld. counsel for op no.3 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Mehta, Manager Law as Ex. RW3/A and statement of account Ex. RW3/I.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as Sh. Satish Kumar, SA on behalf of op no.2 and have perused the case file.
9. From the copy of statement of account of complainant Ex.C4, it is evident that on 31.07.2018 premium amount of Rs.7574/- was deducted from the account of complainant for insurance of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 with op no.1 under PMFBY. The op no.3 bank has taken a categorical stand that complainant was very much annoyed about deduction of premium amount from his account and op no.1 bank appraised him about the scheme of the Government which was mandatory for KCC account holders, but the complainant flatly refused to get his crops insured with any insurance company and as such under compelling circumstances and on the pressure of complainant the op no.1 bank got cancelled insurance application and reversed the amount of premium to the account of complainant in his presence. It is also apparent on record that op no.1 bank discharged its duty by deducting the premium amount on 31.07.2018 but when complainant raised objection about deduction of premium from his account and clearly stated that he does not require any insurance of his crops, therefore, op no.1 bank got cancelled insurance of his crops of Kharif, 2018 and reversed the premium amount on 10.08.2018 i.e. just within 10 days of its deduction to the account of complainant and as such now LRs of the complainant Surjeet Singh are not entitled to any insurance claim from any of the ops.
10. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. 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: 27.02.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
