ORDER

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, President.—These Appeals are filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, aggrieved by the Orders dated 25.08.2018, 01.09.2018, 04.10.2018 passed in Consumer Complaint Nos.134/2017, 122/2017, 143/2017, 144/2017, 145/2017, 146/2017, 147/2017 6/2018, by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chitradurga (for short the District Forum).

2. The facts & Law involved in all these cases are similar and hence they are taken together for consideration.

3. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, who submitted that Crop Insurance amounts claimed by the respective individual Complainants, will be released directly to the account of the concerned Farmer/Complainant, if eligible, based on the crop loss estimation done by the Department of Agriculture. In all these matters, as per the guidelines laid down by the Government under Crop Insurance as per PMBFY, the Deputy Commissioner is a necessary party, who is not made as party and the District Forum failed to appreciate the facts of the same and passing the Impugned Orders are not proper.

4. Perused the Records & the Impugned Order. It is observed that as per the guidelines issued, the Complainants were covered under the Crop Insurance Scheme as per Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana for the year 2016-17 and the respective premium amounts were deducted from their account by the OP’s Bank Branches. On failure of rain & other related natural calamities, the Complainants have suffered loss during the year 2015-16 for which they have preferred their individual Claims on OPS and approached OPs 2 & 3 several times, but, they have not settled the Claims. OP2 has taken a contention before the District Forum that the Proposal Form of the farmers in the locality of P Mahadevapura Village was not within the cut off date, as per Ex-B1 & B2 and OP1 has not sent the Premium amount collected from the Farmers/Complainants. The District Forum on considering the said Pleadings & Evidences led in by both the parties, deemed it fit to allow the Complaints, after enquiring into the matter, directing the OPs 2 & 3 to pay the Insured Amounts to the Farmers/ Complainants with interest, compensation and cost etc., Aggrieved by these Orders, OPs 2 & 3 are in Appeal.

5. Upon examination of the Orders passed by the District Forum, it is observed that the District Forum has not at all considered the cases in detail, as to whether the Complainant/ Farmers have furnished the required details with regard to the loss of their Insured Crop in their respective lands. It also appears that the Forum has not made efforts to get the Report with regard to the alleged loss of the Insured Crops assessed by the OPs. On examination of the records, we could not find any Report with regard to the loss of Crop submitted by the Government. In the absence of such particulars, awarding compensation by the District Forum on hypothetical basis cannot survive. In order to award compensation on the basis of assessment of loss of crop suffered by each one of the Farmer/Complainant, some evidence is required. On this basis, this Commission found force in the contentions of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant and that the Impugned Order suffers from factual infirmity which is required to be corrected in these appeals. Further, it is also noted herein that there is insufficiency of evidence on record and the Deputy Commissioner is not made a necessary party to the proceedings as per the Scheme launched by the Central Government. As such, these matters are required to be remanded to the District Commission to re-consider afresh, by affording an opportunity to the parties concerned to make the State Government as a necessary party and to adduce further evidences by the parties to the disputes, if any. In the result, we proceed to pass the following

ORDER

Appeal Nos. 1863 to 1870/2018 are allowed. Impugned Orders dated 25.08.2018, 01.09.2018 04.10.2018 passed in Consumer Complaint Nos.134/2017, 122/2017, 14