st July 2009 C.C. No. 31 of 2009 C.C. No. 31 of 2009 C.C. No. 31 of 2009 C.C. No. 31 of 2009 C.C. No. 31 of 2009st July 2009

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 31 / 2009

Mantrala Nagendra, S/o Naganna, aged about 35 years,

Hindu, Agriculturist, Residing at Chintakunta Village,

Muddanur Mandal, Kadapa District. ….. Complainant.

Vs.

1) Bruhadeswara Fertiliser’s Oil Cake Fertilizer Merchants,

9/532, Mydukur Road, Proddatur town.

2) M/s Sri Lakshmi Seeds Corporation, D.No. 54-B-35,

Plot No. 30, J.Auto Nagar, Vijayawada. ….. Respondents.

This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 22-6-2009 in the

presence of Sri P. Sekhar Reddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri K. Guru Murthy,

Advocate for respondents and upon perusing the material papers on record, the

Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Sri P.V. Nageswara Rao, President),

1. Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is as follows:- The petitioner sowed Black

gram seed in November 2006 purchased from R1 produced by R2. The duration of

the crop was 85 days and the growth of crop was good. But it had no flowers and

pods. The petitioner followed all precautions and spent Rs. 10,000/- per acre

towards cultivation expenses, fertilizers, pesticides and weeding and seed cost for his

lands of Ac. 3.00 in survey No. 202/1. The R1 gave a wrong direction to the

petitioner that the variety of seed would grow in November. Thus the petitioner

purchased the seed and crop was grown in November. The seed was defective and

substandard for germination. If the seed was perfect and the respondents gave

proper directions the petitioner would get 10 to 15 quintals yield per acre. Due to

supply of substandard seed the petitioner had a loss of Rs. 45,000/- per acre. The

petitioner represented to the Asst. Director of Agriculture, Muddanoor and Panchayat

Secretary of the village. They inspected the crop and gave their opinion. The

petitioner at last got issued a notice to the respondents and they sent a reply. The

2

seed purchased by the petitioner was 16 Kgs on 2-11-2006 under bill No. 395 from

R1. Therefore, the complaint was filed for Rs. 60,000/- per Ac. 3.00 and Rs. 5,000/-

towards cultivation charges totaling Rs. 65,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- towards

deficiency of service and Rs. 10,000/- towards costs.

3. The respondents filed a counter that the petitioner purchased seed from

R1 and selling to the farmers. The minimum seed required per one acre was 8 Kgs.

It was mentioned in Agricultural Panchangam 2005-06 at page 57 to 59 published by

Acharya N.G. Ranga Agriculture University, Hyderabad.

4. The complainant cultivated 3.00 Ac to which he required 24.98 Kgs

Black Gram. But he used 16 Kgs. He had no basic knowledge of cultivation of Black

Gram. One could not expect a minimum yield when the required quantity of seed

was not used for sowing. So Rs. 10,000/- per acre towards cultivation was not

correct. The required expenditure for cultivation per acre was Rs. 1,660/-. The crop

was not a main crop but an intermediary crop. The period of crop was 85 days. The

flowering would start from 35 to 45 days. The yield would be 2 to 5 quintals

depending upon various factors. Normally the average rate per quintal would be

Rs. 2,500/- and it would vary from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 3,000/-. It was not correct

that the R1 gave a wrong direction that the crop would be good in the month of

November. It was not correct that the seed supplied by R2 to R1 was defective and

substandard. The respondents came to know that the complainant got good yield

and sold in the market at Proddatur. The respondents had no knowledge about

representation to the Asst. Director of Agriculture and Panchayat Secretary and they

inspected the land and crop growth and issuing of the opinion. The respondents

were never intimated by Agriculture Department. During the crop season the

complainant did not make any allegations against the respondents and the crop

growth was good. There were no allegations about variety of the crop. The

germination and genetic purity were good. Regarding the defect in germination and

C.C. No. 31 of 2009

DISTRICT FORUM :: KADAPA

PRESENT SRI P.V. NAGESWARA RAO, M.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT

SMT. B. DURGA KUMARI, B.A., B.L., MEMBER

SRI S.A. KHADER BASHA, B.Sc., MEMBER.

Wednesday, 01

3

genetic purity it had to be intimated within 7 days i.e. period required for germination

and within 35 to 45 days i.e the period required for flowering. As the yield was good,

there was no complant. The respondents received a notice after 4 months. The reply

notice was issued by the respondents immediately. There was no complaint from

others, who purchased the same seed. The Mandal Agricultural Officer gave a list of

farmers. The Mandal Agricultural Officer had not alleged any defect of the seed. He

visited after completion of crop season. The certificate of the panchayat Secretary

need not be considered. The yielding of crop was on the basis of water, pest control,

virus, sudden climatic changes and manures. The complainant did not file the seed

analysis report. The certificates issued by the Agricultural officer and V.A.O, were

without any evidence of quality of seed. The seed purchased by the complainant was

not sufficient. There was no deficiency or negligence on the part of the respondents.

Thus the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

5. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for

determination.

i. Whether there is any negligence and deficiency of service on the

part of the respondents?

ii. Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

iii. To what relief?

6. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A5 were marked and on behalf of

the respondents Ex. B1 to B4 were marked.

7. Point No. 1 & 2 The complainant purchased 16 Kgs of Black Gram LBG

645 variety seed under lot No. 157 @ Rs. 380/- per packet of 4Kgs. The quantity of

seed purchased by the complainant was 16 Kgs from R1 on 2-11-2006 for

Rs. 1,520/-. Ex. A1 was the bill issued by R1. The R2 was producer of Black Gram

seed. The duration of the crop was 85 days. After sowing the seed in November 2006

it was grown well in the land but it had no flowers and pods. The petitioner spent

Rs. 10,000/- per acre towards fertilizers, pesticides, land preparation and weeding.

The petitioner contended that he purchased seed under wrong advice given by R1

4

that the crop in the month of November would grow with good yield. Even, after

taking all precautions there was no yield. The reasons were the seed was defective

and substandard. If the seed was not defective and good seed the yield would be 10

to 15 quintals per acre. In the complaint at para – 6 it was disclosed that the Asst.

Director of Agriculture, Muddanoor and Panchayat Secretary inspected the crop and

gave their opinion. But either the opinion or the report of the Asst. Director of

Agriculture was not filed. The complainant filed Ex. A2 a copy of list of farmers

grown Black Gram LBG 645 variety in Yamavaram village of Muddanoor Mandal

issued by Mandal Agriculture Officer, Muddanoor in which the total extent with

survey Nos. and purchase of seed with bill No. and date from R2 by the complainant

was mentioned. Ex. A3 was statement of Panchayat Secretary, Yamavaram that the

farmers shown in the list had raised Black Gram crop in their lands. But there was

no yield. In the statement Ex. A3, it was disclosed the names of farmers and survey

Nos. extent and quantity of seed purchased with bills Nos. and dates. Ex. A3 was

counter signed by Tashildar, Muddanoor as the Black Gram crop did not give good

yield. The complainant got issued a notice along with other farmers to both the

respondents to pay compensation. The office copy of the notice was Ex. A4. Ex. A4

included the reply notice from both the respondents. Ex. A5 was copy of adangal

extract.

8. The respondents filed Ex. B1 and B2 the reply notice issued to the

complainant. The same were filed by the complainant along with office copy of the

notice as Ex. A4. The respondents filed Ex. B3 statement of some other farmers

with their pattadar passbooks in Xerox copies that the Black Gram seed LBG 645

variety gave good yield and hence, it was not a substandard seed. They filed Ex. B4 a

Xerox copy of literature of Black Gram seed and various varieties of seed including

LBG 645. Under Ex. B4 the duration of the crop was 85 to 90 days and the yield per

acre would be around 8 to 10 quintals. In Ex. B4 the method of cultivation including

application of pesticides and fertilizers and quality of both of them and quantity of

5

seed required per acre in dry land during the month of October has been mentioned.

During Rabi season, the time for sowing was October for dry land and for wet land it

was November and the quantity of seed per acre in the dry land was 6.4 Kgs to 7.2

Kgs and in the wet land it was 16 Kgs. The land of the complainant was dry land

and so the crop should be raised in October and not during November and the

required seed was 6.4 Kgs to 7.2 Kgs per acre. But in the present case the Black

Gram LBG 645 variety was sown in November 2006 instead of October 2006 and for

the entire extent of land of the complainant, the petitioner purchased only 16 Kgs

less then the required quantity of 18 Kgs to 21 Kgs. So the complainant raised the

crop in his entire land with 16 Kgs only and hence, he did not get the required

quantity of yield of 8 to 10 quintals per acre as mentioned in Ex. B4 literature. In

addition to it was not mentioned anywhere in the complaint about the quantity

received by the complainant in previous years. He did not file any scrap of paper

regarding purchase of fertilizers, pesticides. In its absence it is clear that the

complainant did not apply any quantity of fertilizers or pesticides to the crop. There

was no calculation arrived for Rs. 65,000/- towards compensation. As soon as the

complainant had an idea that there were no pods to the plant, he would have taken

the report of the Asst. Director of Agriculture about the stage of the crop and defects

in the crop. He did not file the report of Asst. Director of Agriculture. The

respondents also did not file the analysis report regarding the germination of the

seed. There was no proper report from any laboratory or an expert in agriculture. It

could not be said that the seed in question was defective as reported in 2009 CTJ

740 (CP) (NCDRC) Gyan Chandra Sharada Vs. Prabhari Sachiv Kshetriya Sadhan

Sahkari Samiti and others. When the complainant mentioned in para – 6 of the

complaint that the Asst. Director of Agriculture and Panchayat Secretary inspected

the crop, it was his duty to file their report regarding the stage of crop and defects in

not getting yield. The complainant did not file at least the empty packet of the seed

to show when the seed was packed and when the date would be expired and its lot

Nos. The loss of crop was on various factors like excess water, rains, climatic

6

conditions and not using fertilizers and pesticides as mentioned in the concerned

literature and whether there was any disease to the crop. In its absence they could

not say that the Black Gram seed was defective and substandard. The seed was

defective was not proved by the complainant through the Department of Agriculture.

Hence, the points are answered accordingly.

9. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by us in the open forum, this the 01

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant NIL For Respondent : NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant : -

Ex. A1 Cash / Credit bill issued by R1, dt. 26-10-2006.

Ex. A2 Copy of list issued by Mandal Agriculture Officer, Muddanoor, dt. 2-2-07.

Ex. A3 Copy of list issued by Tahsildar, Muddanoor Mandal, dt 21-4-2007.

Ex. A4 Office copy of legal notice from complainant’s advocate to respondents,

dt. 28-2-2007.

Ex. A5 Adangal extract copy of the complainant.

Exhibits marked for Respondents: -

Ex. B1 X/c of reply notice from R2’s advocate to complainant’s advocate,

dt. 9-3-2007.

Ex. B2 X/c of reply notice from R1’s advocate to complainant’s advocate,

dt. 23-3-2007.

Ex. B3 X/c of statement of some ryots with X/c of pattadar passbooks,

dt. 19-3-2007 and 20-3-2007.

Ex. B4 X/c of literature i.e. cultivation of Black Gram seeds.

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1) Sri P. Sekhar Reddy, Advocate.

3) Sri K. Guru Murthy, Advocate.

1) Copy was made ready on :

2) Copy was dispatched on :

3) Copy of delivered to parties :

B.V.P. - - -