Date of filing :17.02.2021 Date of order :08.07.2022 MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

1) FIRST APPEAL NO. : 41 OF 2021 IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 13 OF 2019 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : NANDED.

Surajsing s/o Rupsing Sardar, R/o Barad, Tq. Mudkhed, Dist.Nanded. APPELLANT VERSUS

1. The Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance, 1^st floor, Commercial Zone, behind Yerwada Jail, Samrat Ashok road, Yerwada. Pune.

2. The Manager, Maharashtra Gramin Bank, Br.Barad, Tq.Mudkhed, Dist.Nanded. RESPONDENT No.1&2.

CORAM :Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member.

Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.

Present : Adv.A.G.Vasmatkar for appellant,

J U D G M E N T

(Delivered on 08/07/2022)

Per Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member. 1. The appellants have preferred these appeal No. 41 of 2021 against the order passed by District Consumer Commission in C.C.No. 13/2019 decided by common order dated 28.12.2020.

2. The appellant is the complainant and the respondent No.1 Bajaj Alianz Insurance Company is the opponent no.1. The respondent no.2 SBI Branch Barad is opponent no.2 in the original complaint. They are hereinafter referred complainant and opponents as per their status in the original complaint.

3. It is the case of complainant that, he is having agriculture land at village Barad bearing survey No. 141, area of 88 R. He has cultivated Banana crop in his land and obtained insurance policy from opponent no.1 to insure Banana crop in respect of his land situated at Barad. His land come under Barad Revenue Circle. It is alleged by the complainant that, he has deposited the amount of premium insuring Banana crop though opponent no.2 Bank for the period of 01.12.2016 to 31.07.2017 under the crop insurance scheme sponsored by Govt. known as National weather based scheme and he is the consumer of opponent Nos.1&2. The Maharashtra Govt. has also issued resolution No. (cid:1)वमायो/1016/(cid:11).(cid:13)./84/14-ए (cid:19)द. 29th Oct.2016 for the protection of agriculturists whose crops were affected due to sudden change in the weather such as maximum temperature, minimum temperature, wind speed, or heavy rains. As per said insurance policy agriculturists have to pay 50 % of the amount of premium and Central and State Govt.

have to share 25 % each towards the premium. Accordingly the complainants have deposited the premium through opponent no.2 bank with opponent no.1 Insurance Company. The protected period under said insurance is 1st Nov.2016 to 31st July 2017. It is the contention of complainant that, during aforesaid period due to heavy wind speed complainants have sustained total loss to his crop. Therefore, the opponents were supposed to give compensation to the complainants within 45 days after completion of insured period by depositing the same directly in the bank accounts of the complainants. Thus, the opponents have not deposited the amounts in their accounts and also have not given intimation to them. However, the opponent no.1 has violated terms and conditions of insurance policy and paid part amount of Rs.28,750/- depositing in his bank account and failed to give remaining amount of Rs.1,24,550/-.

4. It is further alleged that, the Govt. of India, Meterological Dept. has issued certain guidelines for installation of weather station by issuing Govt. resolutions. However, weather station of Barad Revenue Centre was installed by violating said guidelines. Therefore, the opponents cannot deny the compensation to complainants on the basis of wrong entries recorded in the weather station.

5. The opponents have denied the claim of complainants. Hence, the complainants filed consumer complaints claiming amount of Rs.1,24,550/- towards compensation against crop insured with interest and amount of metal agony and costs of the proceedings.

6. The opponent no.1 Insurance Company has filed its written statement before District Consumer Commission. Said written statement is at page no.54 to 65. Opponent Insurance C