GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. NAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also examined the record of this case. Under a scheme floated by Government of India for the purpose of Crop Insurance, respondent No. 1 in both these cases having got their crop insured with the appellant through respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is not in dispute. After charging premium from respondent No. 1 in both the appeals by respondent No. 3 -bank, the same was deposited with the appellant, is again admitted by the parties. Rest of the facts have been in detail in the impugned order of the District Forum below in these appeals, ..................................................... Whether the Local Papers may be allowed to see the order? as such they are not being repeated.

(2.) WHEN hearing in these cases commenced, learned Counsel for the appellant made an attempt to persuade us that appellant is not responsible for the payment of compensation awarded, as according to her, extent of alleged loss suffered by the respondents in these appeals was not got assessed as per the procedure prescribed for the said purpose and unless needful was done by following the requisite procedure, her client could not have been held liable for payment of any amount as ordered by the District Forum below. Thus, she prayed for allowing these appeals by setting aside the impugned orders. Alternatively, and without in any manner giving up her earlier plea, she pointed out that even if it be assumed for the sake of arguments that there is any liability for the payment of compensation on account of the alleged failure of crops of the respondents during the relevant year, in such a situation, the compensation assessed is excessive, and interest allowed is on higher side which needs to be reduced to 6% per annum and punitive damage of Rs. 2,500 in each case together with costs of the appeals be also disallowed.

(3.) THESE pleas have been contested by Mr. Verma, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1. As according to him, once insurance is admitted and failure of crops has been established on records, as such no exception can be taken to the impugned order on any of the grounds urged on behalf of the appellant. Thus, he prayed for dismissal of both the appeals with costs while upholding the impugned order.