AGRICULTURAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD Vs. KEMLEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner exhaustively. In our view, impugned order passed by the State Commission does not call for any interference.

(2.) THE District Forum in its order dated 30.11.2005 discussed the contention of the petitioner and held as under:

(3.) HOWEVER , Mr. Mehra, learned Counsel for the petitioner-Insurance Company, after obtaining instructions from the concerned officers, submitted that investigation was carried out by the Agricultural Finance Corporation at the instance of the General Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the GIC) and the investigation report is not considered by the State Commission. In our view, this submission is totally misconceived because the District Forum and the State Commission have arrived at the conclusion that revenue records clearly establishes the case of the complainants that the crop, as stated, for taking the policy, was cultivated by them. Hence, it cannot be said that the State Commission has not considered the investigation report, because the said report would not nullify the revenue records.