Madras HC tells AIC to give list of pending, rejected cases due to complaints
The Madras High Court in India has ordered the Agricultural Insurance Company (AIC) to provide them with the list of pending cases as well as their reasons for those they rejected, following complaints and writ petitions from several farmers who have been unable to receive insurance to cover losses due to natural disaster risk such as cyclones or drought.  
MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has directed the counsel for Agriculutural Insurance Company(AIC) to provide list of cases pending in the court against the company along with the reasons for rejecting the insurance claims.Justice R Sudhakar and Justice V M Velumani gave the direction following complaints and writ petitions by several farmers who were not able to receive the insurance cover amount under the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme(NAIS) launched by the Centre in 2002-03, through AIC.The bench directed the AIC counsel Srinivasaraghavan to provide details by August 11.The petitioner's counsel A Pugazhendi submitted that the cooperative societies, which extend agricultural loan, deducted the insurance premium amount by default before sanctioning the loan. But farmers whose crops were damaged due to vagaries of nature, were not given the insurance amount.Aminus curiae S M Ananthamurugan said as per the NAIS, farmers cultivating notified crops such as paddy, maize, cotton, sugarcane, banana, chilly, ginger, potato, onion, tapioca, turmeric, horsegram and blackgram were eligible to get insured.The financial institutions forced the farmers to cover the the crops under the insurance scheme when they took loan. Even those who do not obtain such loans could get covered by paying the necessary premium on a voluntary basis.On payment of premium the farmer should get insurance to cover losses due to unpreventable risks, which included natural fire and lightning, storm, hailstorm, cyclone, typhoon, tempest, hurricane, tornado, floods, inundation, landslide, drought, dry spells, infestation of pests and afflicting of diseases. But the fact remains that the insurance scheme did not benefit farmers properly, he said.