This C.C came before us for final hearing, in the presence of Sri.Katamneni Ramesh, Advocate for the complainants; Sri R. Hari Prasad, Advocate for opposite parties; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

ORDER

(Per Sri R. Kiran Kumar, Member)

This complaint is filed under section 12-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The averments made in the complaint are that the complainants are agriculturists and they prepared their lands to sow cottonseeds.  The opposite parties have propagated them that the cottonseed SP 1037 BG-II is a standard quality in cotton crop, which is yielded 10 to 12 quintals per acre.  The complainants and other agriculturists of their village believed the information of opposite parties.  The complainants also submitted that the complainant No.1 purchased 4 packets of SP 1037 BG-II and raised the cotton crop to an extent of Ac.2-00gts in Sy.No.599/A, the Complainant No.2 purchased 2 packets of SP 1037 BG-II from the opposite partNo.1, 4 packets from opposite party No.2 and 2 packets from opposite partNo.3 and raised the cotton crop to an extent of Ac.4-00gts in Sy.No.36. 

2.       The complainants further submitted that as per the instructions of the opposite parties, they sowed the seeds by taking all precautions, used pesticides and fertilizers as required, but there is no growth and yielding in the cotton crop because there is sucking pest and leaf spot damage on entire crop and the complainants intimated the same to the Sales Officer and also gave representations to the Agriculture Officer of Julurupadu with regard to defective and poor quality and quantity supplied by the opposite parties.  Also submitted that the complainants spent an amount of Rs.10,000/- per Acre towards purchasing of seed, sowing the crop and for coolies etc. and they lost one year crop, which is minimum of market value for Rs.3,500/- per quintal for a minimum yielding of 10 quintals per acre, as the yielding was completely damaged they are claiming an amount of Rs.45,000/- per acre as the opposite parties failed to pay damages, the complainants approached the Forum.

3.       On behalf of the complainants the following documents were filed and marked as Ex.A1 to A5.      

Ex.A1:-         Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.09-06-2010 for Rs.3000/- 

Ex.A2:-         Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.18-06-2010 for Rs.3125/-

Ex.A3:-         Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.14-06-2010 for Rs.4260/-

Ex.A4:-         Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.26-07-2010 for Rs.1460/-

Ex.A5:-         Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.15-06-2010 for Rs.700/-

4.       On receipt of notice, the opposite parties represented through their counsel and filed counter.  In their counter they denied all the allegations made by the complainants and submitted that the seeds supplied by them are high quality having germination and genetic purity.  Low growth as alleged by the complainants might be because the complainants might have failed to adopt correct method of agricultural practices including use of appropriate pesticides in raising crop.  And also submitted that the complainants can send the seed samples for analysis and if adverse report comes, then only it can be said that the seeds are defective and of inferior, but the complainants not filed adverse report of any laboratory about the quality of seeds and also no experts finding filed to show that the seeds sold to the complainants suffered from any quality defect or did not meet the standards specified for such seeds, in the absence of such report it can not be said that the seeds supplied to the complainants are defective and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

5.       Counsel for opposite parties filed memo to treat their written version as their written arguments.

6.       Upon perusing the material papers on record, now the points that arose for consideration are,

1)  Whether the opposite parties have supplied defective seeds?

2 ) Whether the complainants are entitled to claim the damages?

Points No.1 & 2:-

            In this case, the complainants purchased SP 1037 BG-II seeds from opposite parties and raised cotton crop in their lands.  As per the complainants they followed the instructions of opposite parties taken all precautions and used pesticides and fertilizers as required.  Even though as there is no growth and yielding in the cotton crop because there is sucking pest and leaf spot damage on entire crop and also the complainants intimated the same to the opposite parties and Agricultural Officer of their Mandal.  As the opposite parties failed to pay the damages, the complainants approached the Forum.

          On behalf of the complainants neither oral nor documentary evidence is placed.

          In the absence of any evidence with regard to the quality of seeds, the liability can not be fastened on the opposite parties on the basis of vague allegations made in the complaint.  And also there is nothing on record much less any finding of a competent technical laboratory or expert finding to show that the seeds sold to the complainants by the opposite parties suffered from any quality defect or did not meet the standards as prescribed.  There is no evidence on record to show that the seeds supplied did not possess the standards.  The complainants ought to have examine Agricultural Officer or any scientific or technical person to draw any inference against the opposite parties to prove their case.  The complainants are failed to prove that the opposite parties supplied defective seeds.  Unless and until the complainants prove that the opposite parties supplied defective seeds, they cannot claim any compensation.

                    Accordingly the complaint is dismissed.  There is no order as to costs.    

          Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum on this      day of  January, 2012.

PRESIDENT             MEMBER

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, KHAMMAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined for complainant:-         -  None -

Witnesses examined for opposite parties:-  -None -

Exhibits marked for Complainants: -

Ex.A1:-           Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.09-06-2010 for Rs.3000/- 

Ex.A2:-           Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.18-06-2010 for Rs.3125/-

Ex.A3:-           Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.14-06-2010 for Rs.4260/-

Ex.A4:-           Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.26-07-2010 for Rs.1460/-

Ex.A5:-           Photocopy of cash/credit bill dt.15-06-2010 for Rs.700/-

Exhibits marked for opposite parties:- Nil -

PRESIDENT             MEMBER

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM

KHAMMAM