Complainant/s:           1. Smt. Vanajakshi W/o Karigouda Adur,

                                            Age: 45 Years, Occ: Agriculture,

                                            R/o Koujageri, Taluk:Ron,

                                            District: Gadag.

                                             2. Siddanagouda S/o Karigouda Adur,

                                            Age: 50 Years, Occ: Agriculture,

                                            R/o Koujageri, Taluk:Ron,

                                            District: Gadag.

                                             3. Hanumantagouda S/o Basanagouda                                                      Adur,

                                             Age: 48 Years, Occ: Agriculture,

                                             R/o Koujageri,

                                              Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.

                                            (Rep. by Sri.P.S.Dharmayat, Advocate)   

V/s

ORDER

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SMT.SAMIUNNISA .C.H. PRESIDENT:

        This complaint is filed by the complainants against the OPs claiming certain reliefs by invoking Sec 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

           2.  The above complaint filed by the complainants, stating that they had sowed Jowar, Wheat and Sunflower crops in 2016-17 in their respective lands and insured for the Rabi Season yield and paid the premium through the Nodal Bank.

         3.    The averments of the complaint in brief are:

       That the complainants have sowed the Jowar, Wheat and Sunflower crops in 2016-17 in their respective lands bearing sy. No.22/2 measuring 9-02 Acres, sy.No.26/1 measuring 7-06 Acres, sy.No.25/2A measuring 3-13 Acres and sy.No.22/1 measuring 13-03 Acres situated at Koujageri village and insured the said crops with OP No.1 for the yield and paid the premium amount of Rs.5,106-81 in 2016-17 under PMFBY for a sum assured amount of Rs.3,40,454-42.  The said crops were good and healthy and the complainant hoped that the he would get good yield from the above said crops for the said year.  It is further submitted that, unlikely, the crop failed due to shortfall of rain. The complainants are the non-loanee farmers.  The crops of the complainant were good and healthy and was growing well.  The year 2016-17 was hit by draughts, due to of lack of rainfall, the whole crops of the complainants were ruined and complainants became unhappy.  The complainants expected to receive the compensation for the total loss of the said Rabi season crop.  The policy coverage in case of any natural calamities/disasters to the crops of insured person/farmers, the policy safeguards under such calamities and on this assurance and encouragement, the complainants have purchased the policy to the said year and eagerly waited to receive the crop insurance compensation for the total loss of the crops under the said scheme by all the OPs, but the complainants have not received the compensation amount till today.  Therefore, the complainant got issued legal notice to the OPs on 13.03.2019 calling upon them to pay the compensation, but till today the OPs have not replied for the same.  The cause of action for this complaint arose on 13.03.2019 when the complainants got issued notice to the OPs.   Hence, there is deficiency in service and prayed to order the OPs to pay the total loss and damages of the crops with interest @ 18% p.m from the date of payment of premium amount till payment, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and hardship etc., and court expenses.

        4.   In pursuance of the notice issued by this Commission, the OP No.1 to 3 appeared through their counsels and filed their respective written version. OP No.4 remained absent.

                   The brief facts of the Written Version of OP No.1:-

        5.   OP No.1 stated that the above complaint is not maintainable both in law and also on facts. The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima   Yojana   is   being  implemented in the country under the orders of Government of India vide ref: No.13015/03/2016/credit II dated 23.02.2016 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and cooperation, New Delhi w.e.f., 07.10.2016.  The complainants have demanded for claim settlement in respect of Sunflower(RF) and Wheat(RF) and Jowar(RF) crops pertaining to Holealur Hobli, Ron Taluk, Gadag under Rabi 2016-17.  As per the decision taken in the SLCCCI meeting during Rabi 2016 Season, “Threshold Yields” for Sunflower (RF) crop the moving average yield i.e., 320 Kg/Hectare based on 5 years average yield multiplied by 80% level of indemnity working out to be 256 Kg/Hectare were fixed respectively in Holealur Hobli, Ron Taluk during Rabi-2016 Season and there was a shortfall of 202 Kg/Hectare. 

          State Government already looking after implementation of National Agriculture Insurance Scheme (NAIS)/National Crop Insurance Programme (NCIP) may be designated as Nodal Department for implementation of PMFBY.  The State Level Coordination Committee on Crop Insurance (SLCCCI) presently overseeing implementation of NAIS and NCIP may be authorized to oversee implementation of PMFBY.  It is submitted that, the scheme operates on the basis of “Area Approach” i.e., defined Areas of each notified crop for widespread calamities and insurance unit is village/village Panchayat level, to be decided by the State/UT Government.  Yield date will be furnished to insurance company by State Government/UT, in accordance with the cut-off dates fixed and crops and areas notified, based on total number of CCEs being conducted.  Insurance company should be given complete access to co-witness the CCEs, as also the digital images of the CCEs and relevant data in the requisite format by the State Government.  It is further submitted that, if “Actual yield” per hectare of insured crop for the insurance unit in insured season, falls short of specified “Threshold Yield”, all insured farmers growing that crop in the defined area are deemed to have suffered shortfall in yield of similar magnitude.    

          Claim shall be calculated as per the following formula:

          (Threshold Yield – Actual Yield) X Sum insured

Threshold Yield

          It is further submitted that, the complainants have demanded for claim settlement in respect of, Wheat and Sunflower crops pertaining to Holealur Hobli, Ron Taluk, Gadag District under Rabi 2016-17.  It is further submitted that, as per the provisions of the scheme, the claim has been credited to Nodal Bank and hence, the say of complainants holds no water and service of this OP is not at all deficient.  As per the data, if there is shortfall, eligible claims will be settled and the complainants are hiding the material facts and fraudulently claiming the undue amount and prays to dismiss the complaint.

The brief facts of the Written Version of OP No.2 and 3:-

          6.  OP No.2 and 3 submits that, the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts as there is no deficiency of service on their part and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.  These OPs contended that Complaint of complainant is not maintainable both in law and also on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine.  It is further submitted that, the contents of para 2 and 3 are false and the same is to be proved by the complainant. The contents of para 4 are that, these OPs have not received any premium amount from the complainants under PMFBY and these OPs has not made any assurance with regard to payment of insurance amount to the complainant.    The complainants are not the consumers of these OPs and there is no contract of agreement between the complainant and these OPs that of seller and the buyer.  These OPs made as parties unnecessarily and therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of this OP and hence, prayed to dismiss the complaint. 

            7.  The complainant No.3 filed Chief affidavit along with 27 documents.  On the other hand, OPs have not filed their Chief Affidavit and documents. 

    COMPLAINANTS FILED DOCUMENTS AS follows

8.      On pursuance of the materials, placed by the complainant and OPs, the following points arises for our consideration:-

1. Whether the complainants have proved the deficiency                      in service on the part of the OPs and entitled to any                     relief as averred in the complaint?

2. What Order?

9.  Our findings to the above points are:-

Point No. 1:  Negative

Point No. 2:  As per the final Order

R E A S O N S

           10.  POINT NO.1:  The Complainants have filed this Complaint against the OPs for claiming crop insurance amount for the Rabi season 2016-17 on failure of weather stating that, they have not received the claim amount from the OPs as per the sum assured. 

          11.     OPs filed written version stating that, they have paid the amount as per the formula and terms and conditions of the policy, the same had been briefly mentioned in their written version. 

          12.     On going through the records on file, both the parties have not filed any documents to say that, the complainants had received the payment from the OPs.  But on enquiry during the arguments from the complainants’ Advocate, complainants’ Advocate submits that, they have received the amount from the OP No.1, but they prays for payment of the interest and sum assured amount.  Commission while calculating the formula as per the terms and conditions of the policy, it shows that, as per the submission of District Administrative Officer, the claim has been settled to the complainants in the year 2018 itself.  Hence, we come to the conclusion that, complainants are not entitled for any relief.  As such, we answer Point No.1 in Negative.   

13.  POINT NO. 2: In view of our findings on the above point, the complaint filed by the complainants is partially allowed. In the result, we pass the following: 

//O R D E R//

           1.  The above Complaint is dismissed.  No order as to costs.

          2.  Send the copies of this order to the parties free of cost.

           (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 29^th day of March, 2021)

            (Shri B.S.Keri)                                 (Smt.C.H.Samiunnisa Abrar)

               MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT