M.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

APPEAL NO. 125/2016 Hari Singh S/o Ramlal Deshwali R/o Village Jamonya Ganesh Tahasil Narsinghgarh District Rajgarh (M.P.) ... Appellant VERSUS.

1. Manager Narmada Jhabua Gramin Bank Branch Jhadla Tahasil Narsinghgarh District Rajgarh (M.P.)

2. Manager Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd.

Hoshangabad Road Bhopal (M.P.) ... Respondents APPEAL NO. 126/2016 Kashiram (Now deceased)

Through legal heirs:- 1. Smt. Ramkali Bai W/o Late Kashiram

2. Rajnarayan S/o Late Kashiram Both R/o –

R/o Village Jamonya Ganesh Tahasil Narsinghgarh District Rajgarh (M.P.) ... Appellants

VERSUS.

1. Manager Narmada Jhabua Gramin Bank Branch Jhadla Tahasil Narsinghgarh District Rajgarh (M.P.)

2. Manager Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd.

Hoshangabad Road Bhopal (M.P.) ... Respondents BEFORE;

HON’BLE JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV, PRESIDENT HON’BLE DR. MONIKA MALIK, MEMBER COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

SHRI NARESEH CHOURASIA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT –

APPELLANT MS. UMA GOLANDAJ, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1.

SHRI RAVINDRA TIWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2.

O R D E R

( 16.02.2026 )

The following order of the Bench was delivered by Dr.

Monika Malik, Member.

This order will govern disposal of above mentioned two appeals No. 125/2016 and 126/2016 (filed by complainant/appellant), as common question of facts and law are involved in the matter. However, for the purpose of convenience, facts are taken from appeal No.125/2016, unless otherwise stated.

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.12.2015, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajgarh (for short ‘District Commission’), in complaint case No. 14/2015, whereby the District Commission has dismissed the complaint filed by him

3. The complainant had approached the District Commission on the ground that he is owner of 1.265 hectares of agricultural land in Patwari Halka No.63. He had got a KCC account opened with opposite party No.1/respondent No.1- Narmada Jhabua Gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as ‘Bank’). He had obtained loan of Rs.53,000/-. The complainant alleged that soyabean crop of Kharif of the year 2013 got destroyed due to natural calamity. There was loss to the extent of 51% in the said crop. It has been alleged that the Bank did not send the premium amount, insuring the aforesaid crop and the complainant was not paid the claim amount. He, therefore, alleged deficiency in service against the opposite parties.

4. The Bank resisted the complaint on the ground that the complainant had obtained loan from the Society regarding his crop and the crop was insured. The complainant has already received compensation from the Society and is not entitled to receive compensation from the Bank also, regarding the same crop.

5. The Insurance Company resisted the complaint before the District Commission and submitted that the complainant is not their ‘consumer’. The Bank sends premium regarding crop insurance and in case there is any shortfall, then the Insurance Company assesses the loss and pays the claim amount. In the instant matter since no premium was received by the Insurance Company, it is not liable to pay the claim amount.

6. Heard. Perused the record.

7. Learned counsel for complainant argued that it was categorically submitted by the complainant and was accepted by the Insurance Company also that the premium amount, insuring the Kharif crop of the year 2013 was not received by the Insurance Company. This clearly shows that the Bank had not sent the premium amount to the Insurance Company. Due to aforesaid discrepancy, the complainant was not paid compensation in respect to loss in the crop yield for that particular season. He also referred letter, purportedly issued by Prathmik Krishi Seva Sahakar Samiti (hereinafter referred to as ‘Society’), dated 29.4.2016, in order to show that Rs.25,931/- are still pending to be paid to the complainant in respect to the Kharif cr