Comments
Following an article in these columns ( When Cover for Farmers Came a Cropper , published in BusinessLine, on February 18 ), where the problem of 140-odd farmers in Maharashtra’s Jalna district under PMFBY (Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana) was highlighted, the bank involved – SBI, and the crop insurance company, IFFCO Tokio – have responded to the newspaper. But again, the two are only blaming each other.
Effects of drought
After a visit to Jalna district in Aurnagabad, the writer brought to light that 146 farmers who lost the crops due to drought have not received the insurance settlement for the kharif season 2017. While the banker told farmers that their premium and details was sent to the insurance company, the latter declined receipt of farmer details.
SBI response
In a letter to the paper on Thursday, SBI’s Assistant General Manager, Badnapur branch, said: “We confirm that premium of ₹4,70,595 was remitted on November 6, 2017, for pomegranate and sweet lime, and another ₹5,06,150 was remitted on November 30, 2017, for mango, well within the time line, along with all necessary documents. There is no delay on the part of the bank, in either remitting the premium or submission of list of documents to the insurance company.”
“The NEFT/RTGS reference and acknowledgement clearly shows receipt of premium amount by the company. Now, in e-mail dated February 6, 2019, insurance company states that the company generally received thousands of such amounts and they cannot be expected to reconcile or account for such amounts with the actual list. This is clear abdication of responsibility and sheer negligence. We are sorry to note that IFFCO Tokio neither sends its representative, nor do we receive any communication from them despite our follow-up.”
IFFCO Tokio response
IFFCO Tokio, when asked to reply to the charges by SBI, said: “IFFCO Tokio has not received any list of farmers and related documents other than the premium amount from the concerned SBI Bank branch at Badnapur.”
“In the communication sent to all banks and Lead District Managers (LDM) on October 4, 2017, by us, we clearly highlighted the features of the State government notification, provision of the scheme and guidelines. The banks were also clearly informed that they have to submit all mandatory documents of farmers, along with the premium amount before the cut-off date of respective crops. If there is a breach, then the banks or financial institutions are liable as per the operational guidelines, and the same was highlighted in the letter. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance had sent several reminders to the concerned SBI branch to adhere to the operational guidelines at the earliest.”
“In our letter dated February 6, 2019, to the concerned bank branch, including LDM and district authorities, we have indicated non-receipt of the list of farmers, along with details such as name of farmer, crop, area covered and risk location and the mandatory annexure that is required as per the State government notification within the stipulated dates – November 20, 2017, for pomegranate and sweet orange – and January 18, 2018, for mango. The concerned bank branch has failed to provide any such documents within the stipulated time nor uploaded the same in the national crop insurance portal.”
“We want to bring to your notice that IFFCO Tokio has received premium amounts along with list of farmers data from other SBI branches namely Ambad branch, Jalna branch, Partur branch, Wadi Godri, and RP branches in Jalna district, as well as other bank branches. IFFCO Tokio has processed claims of over 129 eligible beneficiary farmers worth ₹37 lakh of these SBI branches of Jalna district. Moreover, IFFCO Tokio has processed claims worth ₹74 crore to over 17,000 eligible farmers across Maharashtra for the same season, as per the terms and conditions of the notification issued by the State government.”
“Hence, there is no wilful intention of denying the claim to any eligible farmers whose details were received within the stipulated time.”
Now, this brings us back to square one. SBI is not ceding and the insurer, too, has washed its hands off. It is time that the CMO of Maharashtra takes a look at this issue as it concerns the livelihood of 146 farmers.
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.