O R D E R

Heard both sides.

2. The only question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether when premium had been remitted under PRADHAN MANTRI FASAL BIMA YOJANA(PMFBY), the claim for payment of crop insurance amount should be honoured even if the farmer concerned did not have an insurable interest in the land.

3. The petitioner herein claims to be managing the agricultural land belonging to one Arunachalam for the fasli year 2017-18. Premium was remitted in the name of the petitioner. Admittedly, patta as well as adangal in respect of the land stands only in the name of Arunachalam. The relevant clauses set out in the operational guidelines governing the scheme(PMFBY) are as follows:-

“3. Coverage of Farmers

3.1 All farmers including sharecroppers and tenant farmers growing the notified crops in the notified areas are eligible for coverage. However, farmers should have insurable interest for the insured crops and lands. Such farmers are required to submit necessary documentary evidence of land records prevailing in the State (Records of Right (RoR), Land possession Certificate (LPC) etc.)and/or applicable contract/ agreement details/ other documents notified/ permitted by concerned State Government in case of sharecroppers/tenant farmers and the same should be defined by the respective States in the notification itself. Such farmers are also required to essentially submit Aadhar Number and declaration about the crop sown/

crops intended to be sown.

24.Important Conditions /Clauses Applicable for Coverage of Risks

24.1. ICs should have received the premium for coverage either from the bank, channel partner, insurance intermediary or directly. In case of any loss in transit due to negligence by these agencies or nonremittance of premium by these agencies, the concerned bank/intermediaries shall be liable for payment of claims.

24.2 In case of any substantial misreporting by nodal bank /branch with respect to loanee farmers coverage which may include incorrect insured and sown acreage and survey number details, bank account details & IU details etc., the concerned bank only shall be liable for such misreporting.

24.3. Mere sanctioning/ disbursement of crop loans and the submission of proposals/declarations and remittance of premium by farmer/bank, without explicit intent to raise the crop, will not constitute acceptance of risk by Insurance Company. ”

4. In the decision reported in 2008 (10) SCC 626 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd V. M/s. Hira Lal Ramesh Chand & Ors.), it was held that the thing or property insured is called the subject matter of insurance and the assured's interest in that subject matter is called his insurable interest. It is well settled that unless the insured has an insurable interest in the subject matter insured, the insurance claim will not be honoured. In the operational guidelines, it is clearly mentioned that insurable interest has to be evidenced by submission of land records such as record of right, land possession certificate etc. As far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned, it can only be patta, chitta and adangal. Of course, if the claimant has title document in his favour, that would definitely be an acceptable piece of documentary evidence. Mere remittance of premium will not confer any right. Claimant must have an insurable interest in the insured land. In this case, the petitioner could not produce any record standing in his name. When the claim is made under PMFBY, the claimant must fulfil the norms governing the scheme. In as much as the petitioner is unable to do so, the question of interfering with the impugned order does not arise.

5. At this stage, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner apprehends that he may be prosecuted for having made false statement.

6. I am more than satisfied that the petitioner does not deserve to be prosecuted. This is because, he has not made any false statement. Even the District Grievance Redressal Committee did not notice any other d