AKSHAYA KANUBHAI PATEL Vs. BRANCH MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners by this petition have prayed for the appropriate writ to direct the respondents to pay the petitioners the amount of crop insurance and/or claim fixed by the respondents for the year 2001 for the failure of hybrid crop in the Karjan Taluka of Vadodara District and it is also prayed to direct the respondents to adjust the loan account of the petitioners upon the claim so received by the Insurance Company.

(2.) The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioners are the agriculturist having agricultural land located at Karjan Taluka, District: Vadodara. The petitioners had shown Kharif Crop of hybrid cotton in the year 2001 and they were also granted loan by Bank of Baroda as per the scheme known as Rashtriya Krushi Bima Yojna (RKBY) (herein after referred to as the Scheme for the sake of convenience). As per the scheme, when any farmer is granted agricultural loan for crop by any Nationalized Bank, the premium is being deducted from the loan account and is to be forwarded to respondent No.5 by the concerned Bank with the declaration. Thereafter, if there is failure of the crop in the respective area, which has been so covered under the scheme, the claims are being processed and amount to the extent of insurance are being given by crediting the same in the loan account of the respective farmers as per the scheme. It is the case of the petitioners that they had taken loan and the premium was deducted by respondent No.1-Bank of Baroda located at Palaj Branch because the area for the operation for Karjan Taluka was under the Bank of Baroda, Palaj Branch. As per the petitioners, the premium amount was deducted and Bank of Baroda, Palaj Branch together with the declaration, had forwarded the amount of premium to respondent No.5. Thereafter, there was failure of the cotton crop and as a result thereof, the claims of all agriculturist, who had contributed for the premium in Karjan Taluka, were processed. However, no amount was paid to the petitioners nor credited in their loan account and therefore, they had issued legal notice but as nothing came out, hence, the petitioners have preferred the present petition for the above referred relief.

(3.) I have heard Mr.Kariel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.Pranav Desai, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Mr.Rakesh Patel, learned AGP, for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and Mr.Vibhuti Nanavati for respondent No.5.