M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite parties 1 to 3 and 4 are the appellants, in FA.No.249/2009 and 305/2010, respectively.
(2.) The parties are referred in this order, as arrayed in Cc.No.8/2007.
(3.) The complainant, an agriculturist entered into an agreement with the opposite parties 1 to 3, for the supply of sugarcane raised in his field, measuring an extent of 2.50 acres. The normal life of the sugarcane is 10 months. It is the duty of the opposite parties 1 to 3 to issue cutting order, as and when the crops are matured, for cutting, and if they delayed, there would be weight loss, resulting monetary loss to the agriculturist. Despite the request made by the complainant, to issue cutting order for harvest, the opposite parties 1 to 3 failed, though they have obtained group insurance, with the 4th opposite party. Since the sugarcane was not harvested within the stipulated time, it started to dry, and got damaged, reducing the weight loss, for which the insurance company should be made liable. By the delayed cutting order, there was a total loss of Rs.3 lakhs, and the complainant is entitled to same, not only on the basis of deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties 1 to 3, but also against the 4th opposite party, on the basis of the insurance Thus claiming a sum of Rs.3 lakhs, as compensation, with interest, a consumer complaint was filed.;