(1.) These two appeals emanate from the common order dated 5.12.2006 in C.C.No.75 of 2004 and C.C.No.58 of 2004 passed by the District Forum, Krishna at Machilipatnam. F.A.No.469 of 2007 is taken as the lead case.
(2.) The facts of the case as stated in the complaint are that the complainants are the members of the opposite party no.1 society of which the second opposite party is the supervisor and both opposite parties no.1 and 2 are working under the control of opposite parties no.3 and 4. The first opposite party used to lend crop loans to the complainants and remit insurance premium from the loan amount sanctioned to the opposite party no.3 that in turn used to remit the amount to the opposite party no.4. The opposite partyno.4 used to obtain insurance policy covering the risk on the crops raised by the complainants in their respective fields.
(3.) The opposite party no.4 had obtained insurance policy for the period from 1.4.2003 to 30.9.2003. During the year 2003 the third opposite party had given khariff crop loans to the members of the opposite party no.1 society through the opposite parties no.1 and 2. The opposite party no.3 disbursed a sum of Rs.40 lakh to the complainants and other members of the opposite party no.1 society. The loan amount was paid after deducting the crop insurance premium. The opposite party no.3 was in-charge of the affairs of the opposite party no.1 from the year of 2001. During the year 2003-2004 the crop yield was low on account of non-supply of water and the crops were damaged due to cyclone that occurred on 16.12.2003 in Krishna District.