NATIONAL
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
REVISION PETITION NO.
1440 OF 2006
(from the order dated 17.2.2006 in Appeal No.48
of the State
Commission,
Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd.
Petitioner
Kemlegowda
Respondent
REVISION PETITION NO.
1441 OF 2006
(from the order dated 17.2.2006 in Appeal No.38
of the State
Commission,
Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd.
Petitioner
Seethamma
Respondent
REVISION PETITION NO.
1443 OF 2006
(from the order dated 17.2.2006 in Appeal No.49
of the State
Commission,
Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd.
Petitioner
Kumar
Respondent
REVISION PETITION NO.
1445 OF 2006
(from the order dated 17.2.2006 in Appeal No.48
of the State
Commission,
Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd.
Petitioner
C.K. Swamy and another
Respondents
REVISION PETITION NO.
1447 OF 2006
(from the order dated 17.2.2006 in Appeal No.36
of the State
Commission,
Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd.
Petitioner
Jayaram & another
Respondents
BEFORE :
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE M.B. SHAH,
PRESIDENT
MRS. RAJYALAKSHMI RAO, MEMBER
For the
Petitioner : Mr. Vishnu Mehra,
Advocate
05.10.2006
M.B. SHAH, J. PRESIDENT.
Heard the
learned counsel for the petitioner exhaustively. In our view, impugned order passed by the
State Commission does not call for any interference.
The District Forum in its order dated
30.11.2005 discussed the contention of the petitioner and held as under:-
In
this case, the respondent no.1 has only one objection, that is, the complainant
during 2002 season has not at all grown any potato crop in his land (
Relying upon
the said findings recorded by the District Forum, the State Commission, and
Karnataka held that there is no reason to doubt the revenue record produced by
the complainants.
However, Mr.
Mr. Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioner-
Insurance Company, after obtaining
instructions from the concerned officers, submitted that investigation was
carried out by the Agricultural Finance Corporation at the instance of the
General Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the GIC) and the
investigation report is not considered by the State Commission. In our view, this submission is totally
misconceived because the District Forum and the State Commission have arrived
at the conclusion that revenue records clearly establishes the case of the
complainants that the crop, as stated, for taking the policy, was cultivated by them. Hence, it cannot be said that the State
Commission has not considered the investigation report, because the said report
would not nullify
the revenue records.
Further it is
to be stated that Government pronounces various schemes for welfare of the
farmers. Insurance schemes are also
pronounced every year
so that farmers get insurance coverage. In case there is failure of crop, the
bureaucrats implement the said schemes in such a way that farmers are required
to spend the amount in litigation and in approaching the officers. This not only increases corruption, but also causes
financial hardship to the farmers. This is unfortunate part of life.
With regard
to the investigation report, we have to state that the report is an
afterthought and it would not nullify what is recorded on the spot by the
Village Accountants
with regard to cultivation of the crop.
However, at the end, we would state
that conclusions and recommendations of investigation report which is produced
before us may be implemented by the Authority. Relevant recommendations are as under:-
B. Recommendations
The different officials of the agencies involved in various stages of processing and
implementation of crop insurance scheme like Village Accountants, Bankers, etc., should be properly trained and guided. This would go a
long way to streamline and strengthen the effectiveness of the scheme to ensure
smooth operation/fair-play in settlement of claims so as to achieve the desired
goals of the Government.
(a) Village Accountants
The Village Accountants should be properly trained and guided regarding
their role in issue of Certificates and furnishing relevant information correctly and
timely. Field visits should be invariably insisted upon and certificates should
be based on the visits and updated records.
(b) Bankers
The bankers should
also be trained in guiding the farmers in filling up the proposal forms. As far as possible, they should ensure that the insurer
or his, representative fills the forms. Correct guidance should be given
regarding details to be furnished such as Survey Numbers, Crop and Area Grown,
cut-off dates, etc. The bankers should scrutinize the proposal forms, in detail
with respect to attachments like Area Sown Certificates, RTCs
and ensure the correctness of information provided. They should also maintain
the proposal forms in a systematic manner.
(c) Govemment
of Karnataka
A co-ordinated action of the
implementing departments, viz., Revenue and Agriculture and Banks must be
insured by GOK.
It must be ensured that complete information to all participating
farmers in respect of notified crops, notified areas, seasonality disciplines,
cut-off date, insurance premium payable in respect of
A, Band C parts based on threshold yields, etc.
Strict action may be initiated on those indulging in malpractices and wrong claims. Appropriate action to be taken/initiated in this regard should be decided- in consultation with GIC, DOA and
Revenue Department.
(d). GIC/ AIC
A coordinated action of all stakeholders should be ensured.
The scheme should be planned in advance and sufficient
notice given to all participating farmers/agencies.
Orientation to participating agencies should be adequate.
In view of varying rainfall distribution pattern across Karnataka, cut off dates for seasonality, discipline could be different for different districts instead of common cut-off date for the State as a whole.
Last day rush for payment of premium by farmers should be
avoided as it results in improper processing of proposal forms. The schemes should be planned and implemented well
in advance.
In any case
the Recommendation: Different officials of the agencies involved in various
stages for processing the implementation of the crop insurance scheme like Village Accountants, Bankers etc. should
be properly trained and guided be
implemented at least by the GIC before
recovering the premium from the poor farmers and in any case before
giving them hope that if there is failure of the crop, they would get
the assured sum within reasonable time and they would not be driven from pillar
to post i.e. from officer to officer and
from court to court and face various hurdles and litigation. Recommendations of
such investigating agency are required to be implemented and are not to be used
only for litigation. This leads to
frustration and corruption. Todays
newspaper report reveals that
With these
observations, these revision petitions are dismissed.
Registry is directed to communicate a
copy of this order to the Secretary, Government of Inda, Ministry
of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi-110001 for taking appropriate action so that farmers may not
suffer and such schemes are
implemented properly.
Sd/-
J.
(M.B. SHAH)
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(RAJYALAKSHMI RAO)
MEMBER
Sg/1