The Madras High Court Bench here has decided to find a solution to frequent complaints of several farmers not being able to receive insurance cover amount under the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) floated by Agricultural Insurance Company (AIC) formed at the behest of the Union Finance Ministry in 2002-03.
During the hearing of one such case on Wednesday, a Division Bench of Justices R. Sudhakar and V.M. Velumani directed D. Srinivasaraghavan, counsel for AIC, to provide by Tuesday a list of cases pending in the court against the company besides producing details of the insurance scheme and the reasons for rejecting the claims made by farmers.
Earlier, petitioner’s counsel S. Pugazhendhi claimed that the cooperative societies, which extend agricultural loan to famers, deduct the insurance premium amount by default before disbursing the loan amount. Yet, the farmers, who suffer crop loss due to vagaries of nature, are denied the insured amount by citing one reason or the other, he alleged.
Assisting the court, advocate S.M. Ananthamurugan, pointed out that AIC was incorporated by the Centre as an exclusive corporation for agriculture insurance. As per the NAIS, farmers who grow notified crops such as paddy, maize, cotton, sugarcane, banana, chilly, ginger, potato, onion, tapioca, turmeric, horsegram and blackgram were eligible to get insured.
The scheme covers on a compulsory basis, all the farmers who grow the notified crops and avail agricultural loans from financial institutions. Even those who do not obtain such loans could get covered by paying the necessary premium on a voluntary basis. On payment of premium, comprehensive risk insurance would be provided to cover losses due to unpreventable risks.
NAIS covered losses suffered by the insured farmers due to natural fire and lightning, storm, hailstorm, cyclone, typhoon, tempest, hurricane, tornado, floods, inundation, landslide, drought, dry spells, infestation of pests and afflicting of diseases. “However, the stark reality, remains that the insurance amount does not reach the farmers properly,” the lawyer told the court.
Source - http://www.thehindu.com/
