Telangana

Mahbubnagar

CC/08/77

Ganji Manemma W/o Late Ramalingappa O/c Agriculture - Complainant(s)

Versus

Agricultural Officer, Kosgi (Mdl), Mahabubnagar. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri C. Rajender Kumar

24 Oct 2008

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM AT MAHABUBNAGAR

Friday the 24th day of October, 2008

 

                                                              Present:- Sri M.Rama Rao, B.A.,LL.B., President

     Sri P.Venkateshwara Rao, B.com., LL.B., Member

       Smt.B.Vijaya Kumari, M.Sc. B.Ed., C.C.P., Member

 

                                                                               C.C.NO. 77  Of   2008

Between:-

Ganji Manemma, W/o Late Ramalingappa, Aged: 58 years, Occ: Agriculture,R/o 1-30, Sarjakhanpet village, Kosgi Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.  

                                                                                              

        … Complainant.

And

1. Agricultural Officer, Kosgi Mandal, Mahabubnagar. 
2. Joint Director of Agriculture, Agricultural Dept., Station Road, Mahabubnagar.

 

                                                                                      … Opposite Parties

 

 

 This C.C. coming on before us for final hearing on 23-10-2008, in the presence of Sri C. Rajender Kumar, Advocate, Mahabubnagar for the complainant and the opposite parties having been set exparte and having stoodover for consideration till this day, this Forum delivered the following:

 

O R D E R

 

(Sri P.Venkateshwara Rao, Member)

 

1.        This is a complaint filed on behalf of the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.45,000/- to the complainant towards cost of the crop yield and Rs.45,000/- towards causing mental agony and also costs of the complaint.

 

2.      The complaint averments are as follows:-  The complainant is an agriculturist, having land bearing Sy.No.209 with sub division numbers AA, E,EE & U, total extent Ac.02-20gts. situated within the limits of Eajipur of Kosgi Mandal, Mahabubnagar district.   The opposite party No.1 is the Mandal Agricultural Officer of Kosgi Mandal and the opposite party No.2 is the district officer of the agricultural department.  As per the government policy, on the instructions of OP.2, OP.1 has sold seeds during the year 2007.  Accordingly OP.1 has sold seeds to the farmers in the Kosgi Mandal and accordingly the complainant has approached OP.1 on 2.6.2007 and purchased red gram seed (LRG-30) of 16 kilograms       (four bags containing each bag of 4 kgs. seed).    OP.1 has issued permit slip for supply of seed and also the cash receipt No.769874 dated 2.6.2007 for Rs.248/- in the name of complainant.   The complainant is a small farmer eking out her livelihood on agriculture from the land.  The complainant has sowed the seed purchased from OP.1 in her land bearing Sy.No.209 supra extent Ac.02-20gts.  The complainant has taken all precautionary measures and followed good management practices like manure, pest control, etc.  The complainant has also applied fertilizers and pesticides from time to time and incurred huge expenditure towards the purchase of the fertilizers and pesticides.   The complainant has purchased DAP, Endoparry, fantac Plus, EMI, Dhanvit, Nisarga and applied for crop for better yield of the crop.  The complainant has purchased regular pesticides etc. at Puja Agencies, Kosgi and all the cash receipts for the purchase of pesticides are filed herewith.  After  5 months, in the month of November, 2007 second week the complainant noticed that the red gram crop is affected by wilt disease and the crop/plants became yellow, wither and died in patches and the crop is totally damaged.  The same is intimated to OP.1 in the second week of November, 2007 and OP.1 visited the red gram crop on 17.11.2007 and inspected the crop and its damaged condition.   OP.1 has assured to the complainant that the condition of the crop and damage will be intimated to the higher officials and loss will be compensated through the government.   The surrounding farmers of the complainant’s land have used the seed available in the village and their crop is well and good and they gained good yield from the crop.  But the complainant sustained loss by using the seed which is purchased from OP.1.   The complainant sustained about 15 bags red gram yield as such she sustained a loss of Rs.45,000/- as the each bag red gram is valued at Rs.3,000/-.   Later on 19.11.2007 the complainant has submitted a compliant to the District Collector, Mahabubnagar, narrating the above and requested for compensation.  Then on the District Collector, Mahabubnagar has sent the requisition of the complainant to OP.2 and as per his suggestion on 14.12.2007, a team of officials comprising 1) Dr. SVS Gopala Swamy, Scientist (Entomology) DAATTC, Mahabubnagar 2) Sri B. Surya Narayana Murthy, DDA, Mahabubnagar  3) Smt. K. Venkata Laxmi, A.O., Kosgi (OP.1) visited the red gram crop land of the complainant and observed that the red gram crop is affected by wilt and 100% wilt of red gram crop which is a pod formation stage in 2½ acres field of the complainant.  The said Dr. SVS Gopala Swamy, Scientist, DAATTC Center, Mahabubnagar, has submitted his diagnostic report to the Director of Research, ANGRA University, Hyderabad and a copy of it also sent to the complainant.  The same is filed herewith for perusal of this Hon’ble Forum.  It is submitted that the complainant has lost yield of 15 bags which is cost of Rs.3,000/- per bag totaling to Rs.45,000/- and the same shall be paid by OPs only.  The complainant suffered mental agony due to the supply of impure seed by OPs for which she is entitled for compensation.  Hence the complaint.   

 

3.     The opposite parties are set exparte.  

 

4.  The complainant filed her affidavit and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-12.

 

5.   The point which falls for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?

 

6.   The opposite parties have been served with the notice but however failed to appear before the Forum.  Hence there is no rebuttal to the contention of the complainant.   The complainant relied upon Exs.A-1 to A-12 to prove her case.  The perusal of Ex.A-1 proves that she is an agriculturist.  Ex.A-2 and A-3 show that she purchased LRG-30 variety red gram seed of 16 kgs. from OP.1 by paying Rs.248/- to opposite party department.  Ex.A-4 to A-7 prove that she purchased fertilizers and pesticides and spent Rs.9,075/- for that purpose.  Ex.A-8 and A-9 prove that before commencement of cultivation she got soil testing report from the OP department.   Ex.A-12 proves that she approached the District Collector, Mahabubnagar on 19.11.2007 and made representation under intimation to OP.2 and the District Collector directed OP.2 to inspect and do needful.  Ex.A-11 is the inspection report dated 18.12.2007 of Scientist, (Entomology) DAATTC, AMC, Mahabubnagar.  It reveals that the team comprising 1) Dr. SVS Gopala Swamy, Scientist (Entomology) DAATTC, Mahabubnagar 2) Sri B. Surya Narayana Murthy, DDA, Mahabubnagar  3) Smt. K. Venkata Laxmi, A.O., Kosgi (OP.1) along with the complainant visited the agricultural fields of the complainant and others on 14.12.2007 as suggested by OP.2.   The complainant solely relied upon this Ex.A-11 to prove her contention that OPs supplied inferior quality seeds.   We have gone through the said report.  It is clear from the report that the red gram crop of the complainant suffered with 100% wilt in 2½  Acres of land of the complainant at pod formation stage and the said wilt diseases have been found increasing year by year in Mahabubnagar district in several crops including red gram.  The variety sown was LRG 30 and was sown on 10.6.2007 and the said variety seed was supplied by OP department on 50% subsidy.  Both the LRG 30 and LRG 41 variety red gram seed are highly susceptible to wilt.  The team also mentioned in the said report that these variety is not advisable to the fields in Mahabubnagar and PRG 15 & ICPC 87119 have to be encouraged.   So it is crystal clear that the seed supplied by OP is substandard and not suitable to the fields of Mahabubnagar district and highly susceptible to wilt and for that reason the entire crop of the complainant suffered with 100% wilt.  The opposite parties knowing fully well that the variety LRG 30 and LRG 41 are highly susceptible to wilt have supplied the same to the farmers of Mahabubnagar district including the complainant.  It is bounden duty and obligation on the part of the Agricultural Officers concerned to advise the farmers properly in selection of seed variety and agricultural methods to be adopted for better output but in the instant case, the Agricultural Department itself supplied the seed variety of LRG 30 which is highly susceptible to wilt.  Thus the ryots were misled by both the Agricultural Officers i.e., OPs in both ways by loosing the capital and crop output but for the non resistance seed.  OPs have even not chosen to appear before the Forum inspite of serving notice on them.  There is no rebuttal to the report of the Agricultural Scientist i.e., Ex.A-11.   Therefore we hold that supply of substandard seed is nothing but deficiency in service on the part of OPs.  In view of the facts and circumstances, in our considered opinion the complainant is successful in proving her case of deficiency in services against OPs for supplying of nonresistance and substandard seed, as such she is entitled for the compensation.         

 

7.   The complainant is claiming Rs.45,000/- towards her crop loss and additional amount of Rs.45,000/- towards compensation for all her sufferances and costs of the proceedings.    The complainant filed bills to prove that she has invested Rs.9,323/- in total under Ex.A-1, A-4 to A-7 towards cost of the seed, fertilizers and pesticides for the crop.   We feel she is rightly entitled for this amount.  However she is claiming Rs.45,000/- towards crop loss in her complaint.  But whereas in Ex.A-12 i.e., in the representation made to the District Collector she mentioned that she sustained crop loss to the tune of Rs.30,000/-. The complainant sowed the crop in 2½ Acres and might have spent amount for agricultural operations and labour charges and she also sustained loss of crop output.     Therefore we feel awarding Rs.30,000/- is proper.    There is no material before us to consider the claim of Rs.45,000/- towards compensation. Therefore we are not inclined to award such amount.  However we feel that the complainant is entitled for Rs.500/- towards costs of the proceedings as she filed the complaint by paying court fee and engaging advocate.    

 

8.    In the result, the complaint is allowed by directing OPs.1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay Rs.39,323/- towards crop loss and investment amount and Rs.500/- towards costs of the proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order.   

 

   Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 24^th day of October, 2008.           

 

        

 MEMBER                                MEMBER                              PRESIDENT 

        Appendix of evidence

       Witness examined

 

For complainant: Nil                                                 For opposite parties:  Nil

Exhibits marked for Complainant:-

 

Ex.A-1:        Xerox copy of title deed.

Ex.A-2:        Permit slip for supply of seeds, dt.2.6.2007.

Ex.A-3:        Cash bill, dt.2.6.2007.

Ex.A-4:        Original bill, dt.12.6.2007.

Ex.A-5:        Original bill, dt.25.8.2007.

Ex.A-6:        Original bill, dt.15.9.2007.

Ex.A-7:        Original bill, dt.17.9.2007.

Ex.A-8:        Original bill, dt.22.12.2007.

Ex.A-9:        Original Soil test report.

Ex.A-10:      Five photographs of the damaged crop.

Ex.A-11:      Copy of diagnostic report, dt.18-12-2007.

Ex.A-12:      Copy of requisition, dt.19.11.2007.

  

Exhibits marked for OPs:- 

 

    - Nil-

 

By the Forum:

     - Nil-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            PRESIDENT

Copy to:-

1. Sri C. Rajender Kumar, Advocate, Mahabubnagar for the complainant.

2.  Agricultural Officer, Kosgi Mandal, Mahabubnagar. 

3. Joint Director of Agriculture, Agricultural Dept., Station Road, Mahabubnagar.