Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The  complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that  he is an agriculturist by profession and on 05.03.2021 he purchased 30 Kg seed of paddy Pusa-44 from Opposite Party No.1 vide invoice No. 11228 for sowing the paddy crop for 09 acres of his agricultural land and said paddy seed is produced and marketed by Opposite Party No.2 whereas Opposite Party No.1 is the seed dealer.  Further alleges that at the time of selling the said paddy seeds, Opposite Party No.1 assured the complainant that the seeds of paddy Pusa-44 was of foundation and certified seeds and the yield of the same would be more than 32 quintal per acre.  As per the assurance of the Opposite Party No.1, the complainant had purchased  the seeds and sown  the same in 9 acres of land i.e. six acres of own land and 3 acres land were taken by the complainant on lease basis  from Gurpreet Singh son of Bikkar Singh, resident of village: Dharam Singh Wala, District  Moga. The complainant had sown the paddy as per the specification and directions of Opposite Party No.1 with due care and safeguards by bearing costs of diesel, fertilizer, pesticides, labour etc. In the month of July, 2021 the complainant noticed that more than 50% of the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard and he immediately visited the shop of Opposite Party No.1 and also informed to Opposite Party No.2. After receiving the complaint, both the Opposite Parties through their representatives visited the fields of the complainant and found that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard. Again in the month of September, 2021, Opposite Parties inspected the fields of the complainant and found that there was adulteration in seeds. On 2.09.2021 Opposite Party No.1 after visiting the spot and after inspecting the fields of the complainant himself admitted that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard and as such, Amandeep Arora of Opposite Party No.1 executed an affidavit in which he admitted that said seeds of Parag Seeds Private Limited Company (Opposite Party No.2) was sold to complainant. Opposite Party No.1 further assured the complainant that if the production of paddy yield remains less than 32 quintal per acre, then the would compensate  the complainant. Not only this, Opposite Party No.2 also admitted in his affidavit that his company had sold the paddy seeds to Opposite Party No.1 and they further sold the same to the complainant.  On 11.10.2021 the paddy crop of the complainant was harvested in the presence of the Opposite Parties and same was sold in the grain market Kot Ise Khan at the shop of Bhullar Commission Agent, Kot Ise Khan, District Moga. The total weight of the paddy produce of nine acres of land was 135 quintal and average yield of paddy crop of complainant was of 15 quintal per acre, whereas the Opposite Parties assured the complainant that the average yield of the produce would be more than 32         quintal per acre. In this way, more than 50% yield remained shortage in the crop of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant many times visited the shop of the Opposite Party No.1 and requested to make good his loss, but the Opposite Parties did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and resiled from the commitment made by them. Due to the aforesaid illegal and unwarranted acts of the Opposite Parties, the complainant suffered huge mental tension and  agony and as such   there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       The Opposite Parties may be directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,99,880/- due to shortage of 153 quintal paddy yield from 9 acres of land due to adulterated, sub standard and defective quality of seeds.  

b)      The amount of Rs.1 lakh  be allowed to be paid by the opposite parties on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant.

c)       The cost of complaint amounting to Rs.22,000/- may please be allowed.

d)      And any other relief to which this Hon’ble Consumer Commission, Moga may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice and equity.       

2.       Opposite Party No.1  appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing  the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable  as the complainant  has not approached this Commission with clean hands as the Opposite Party No.1 has sold only 30 kg seeds as per the instruction and research of Agriculture Department. Further, Opposite Party No.1 is not liable to pay any amount as alleged as he has sold the seed in a packed bag which was received from Opposite Party No.2 and that there is no documentary evidence from which it can be proved that there is a shortage of produce of paddy. No khasra girdawri or jamabandi has been produced regarding the paddy of 9 acres of land. Further with 8 kg seedling, one acre of land paddy can be grown as per the instructions and research of Agricultural Department. On merit, Opposite Party No.1 took up almost the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and it is prayed that the complaint being false and frivolous and the same may be dismissed.

3.       Opposite Party No.2 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing  the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable. The complainant has filed the present complaint at the behest of Opposite Party No.1 who has fabricated a fake bill invoice No. 11228 dated 05.03.2021 to show  the sale of 30 Kg seed of paddy PUSA-44 to show the sale of 30 Kg seed of Paddy PUSA-44, whereas the seed sold by the Opposite Party No.2 to the Opposite Party No.1 vide bill No. 15 dated 17.04.2021 could not be deemed to be sold on 05.03.2021 which is the date of selling of seed as per Invoice No. 11228 dated 05.03.2021 meaning thereby  the aforesaid complaint has been got filed by the Opposite Party No.1 through the complainant.  The tag of Parag Seed itself is issued by the HSSCA Panchkula on April, 2021 it is clear beyond doubt that Opposite Party No.1 could not be deemed to purchase the said seeds before April, 2021 and as such, the complaint is false and bogus and is based on forged and fabricated bill, collusive between the complainant and Opposite Party No.1. As such, if any seed has been purchased by the complainant from Opposite Party No.1 and not manufactured by  Opposite Party No.2 and hence, the  complaint against Opposite Party No.2 is not maintainable and the same deserves to be dismissed. On merits, Opposite Party No.2 took up almost the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections.          

4.       In order to  prove  his  case, the complainant has tendered into  evidence his affidavit Ex.C1/A, additional affidavit of c Ex.C1/B, affidavit of Gurpreet Singh son of Bikkar Singh Ex.C1/C, affidavit of Davinder Singh son of Arbel Singh Ex.C1/D alongwith copies of documents C2 to Ex.C13 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

5.       On the other hand,  to rebut the evidence of the complainant,  Opposite Party No.1 also tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Amndeep Arora Ex.OP1/1 and Ex.OP1/2 alongwith copy of document Ex.OP1/3. Similarly, Opposite Party No.2 tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Bhupinder Kumar Goyal, Director of company Ex.OP2/1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP2/2 to Ex.OP2/4 and thereafter, both the Opposite Parties closed their respective evidence.   

6.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and also  gone through the documents placed  on record.

7.       During the course of arguments, ld.counsel for the complainant as well as ld.counsel for Opposite Parties have  mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as written reply respectively. We have perused the rival contentions of the parties and also gone through the record on file. The main contention of the complainant is that he is an agriculturist by profession and on 05.03.2021 he purchased 30 Kg seed of paddy Pusa-44 from Opposite Party No.1 vide invoice No. 11228 for sowing the paddy crop for 09 acres of his agricultural land and said paddy seed is produced and marketed by Opposite Party No.2 whereas Opposite Party No.1 is the seed dealer. Copy of the bill is placed on record as Ex.C2. Ld.counsel for the complainant further contended  that at the time of selling the said paddy seeds, Opposite Party No.1 assured the complainant that the seeds of paddy Pusa-44 was of foundation and certified seeds and the yield of the same would be more than 32 quintal per acre and as per the assurance of the Opposite Party No.1, the complainant had purchased  the seeds and sown  the same in 9 acres of land i.e. six acres of own land and 3 acres land were taken by the complainant on lease basis  from Gurpreet Singh son of Bikkar Singh, resident of village: Dharam Singh Wala, District  Moga. The complainant had sown the paddy as per the specification and directions of Opposite Party No.1 with due care and safeguards by bearing costs of diesel, fertilizer, pesticides, labour etc. In the month of July, 2021 the complainant noticed that more than 50% of the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard and he immediately visited the shop of Opposite Party No.1 and also informed to Opposite Party No.2. After receiving the complaint, both the Opposite Parties through their representatives visited the fields of the complainant and found that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard. Again in the month of September, 2021, Opposite Parties inspected the fields of the complainant and found that there was adulteration in seeds. On 2.09.2021 Opposite Party No.1 after visiting the spot and after inspecting the fields of the complainant himself admitted that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard and as such, Amandeep Arora of Opposite Party No.1 executed an affidavit in which he admitted that said seeds of Parag Seeds Private Limited Company (Opposite Party No.2) was sold to complainant. Opposite Party No.1 further assured the complainant that if the production of paddy yield remains less than 32 quintal per acre, then the would compensate  the complainant. Not only this, Opposite Party No.2 also admitted in his affidavit that its company had sold the paddy seeds to Opposite Party No.1 and they further sold the same to the complainant.  On 11.10.2021 the paddy crop of the complainant was harvested in the presence of the Opposite Parties and same was sold in the grain market Kot Ise Khan at the shop of Bhullar Commission Agent, Kot Ise Khan, District Moga. The total weight of the paddy produce of nine acres of land was 135 quintal and average yield of paddy crop of complainant was of 15 quintal per acre, whereas the Opposite Parties assured the complainant that the average yield of the produce would be more than 32           quintal per acre. In this way, more than 50% yield remained shortage in the crop of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant many times visited the shop of the Opposite Party No.1 and requested to make good his loss, but the Opposite Parties did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and resiled from the commitment made by them. On the other hand, ld.counsel for Opposite Party No.1 has repelled the aforesaid contention on the ground that he has sold the seeds as he has purchased in a packed bag from Opposite Party No.2 and he has no fault at all.  The defence of the Opposite Party No.2 is that the complainant has filed the present complaint at the behest of Opposite Party No.1 who has fabricated a fake bill invoice No. 11228 dated 05.03.2021 to show  the sale of 30 Kg seed of paddy PUSA-44 to show the sale of 30 Kg seed of Paddy PUSA-44, whereas the seed sold by the Opposite Party No.2 to the Opposite Party No.1 vide bill No. 15 dated 17.04.2021 could not be deemed to be sold on 05.03.2021 which is the date of selling of seed as per Invoice No. 11228 dated 05.03.2021 meaning thereby  the aforesaid complaint has been got filed by the Opposite Party No.1 through the complainant, but we do not agree with the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties because in the duly sworn affidavit of Amandeep Arora son of Inderjit Arora, owner of  Arora Brothers (Opposite Party No.1)  Ex.C7 has admitted that  he has sold the seed  to the complainant which he purchased from Prag Seeds Private Limited Company Fatehbad and said seed was sowed by the complainant in his 9 acres of land.

8.       First of all,  it is contended by the complainant that he is owner of 6 acres of land and 3 acres of land he has taken on lease from Gurpreet Singh son of Bikkar Singh, resident of Village: Dharam Singh Wala, Tehsil: Dharamkot, District Moga and in this regard, the complainant has placed on record the duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Gurpreet Singh lessee of the land in which it has specifically deposed by him that he had  given his 3 acres of land to complainant Gurmail Singh on lease basis and this contention of the complainant has nowhere denied by the Opposite Parties by filing any evidence on record. The case of the complainant is that when the seed so purchased by  him from the Opposite Parties, then he immediately made complaint in this regard to both the Opposite Parties and after   receiving the complaint, both the Opposite Parties through their representatives visited the fields of the complainant and found that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard. Again in the month of September, 2021, Opposite Parties inspected the fields of the complainant and found that there was adulteration in seeds. On 2.09.2021 Opposite Party No.1 after visiting the spot and after inspecting the fields of the complainant himself admitted that the seeds were adulterated and of sub standard and as such, Amandeep Arora of Opposite Party No.1 executed an affidavit in which he admitted that said seeds of Parag Seeds Private Limited Company (Opposite Party No.2) was sold to complainant. Opposite Party No.1 further assured the complainant that if the production of paddy yield remains less than 32 quintal per acre, then he would compensate  the complainant. Not only this, Opposite Party No.2 also admitted in his affidavit that his company had sold the paddy seeds to Opposite Party No.1 and they further sold the same to the complainant.  It is the further contention of the complainant that 11.10.2021 the paddy crop of the complainant was harvested in the presence of the Opposite Parties and the total weight of the paddy produce of nine acres of land was 135 quintal and average yield of paddy crop of complainant was of 15 quintal per acre, whereas the Opposite Parties assured the complainant that the average yield of the produce would be more than 32   quintal per acre. In this way, more than 50% yield remained shortage in the crop of the complainant. In the duly sworn affidavit of Amandeep Arora son of Inderjit Arora, owner of  Arora Brothers (Opposite Party No.1)  Ex.C7 has admitted that  he has sold the seed  to the complainant which he purchased from Prag Seeds Private Limited Company Fatehbad and said seed was sowed by the complainant in his 9 acres of land. The owner of Opposite Party No.1 has also deposed in his affidavit that  if the yield of the crop remains less than  32 quintal  in acres, then they will compensate the complainant. Not only this, Sh.Bhupinder Kumar Goyal, Proprietor of Prag Seeds Private Limited, Fatehbad in his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C8 also deposed that they have sold the said seed to Opposite Party No.1 Arora Brothers and this seeds was  further sold by Opposite Party No.1 to the complainant. He has also deposed that if the yield of the crop remains less than  32 quintal  in acres, then they will compensate the complainant.  In his aforesaid affidavit, Sh.Bhupinder Singh Goyal Proprietor of Prag Seeds Private Limited, Fatehbad also stated that if he wriggle out from this terms and conditions,  he will be liable for legal action. These affidavits filed by the complainant on record Ex.C7 and Ex.C8 have nowhere denied by the Opposite Parties. So, from the entire unrebutted and unchallenged  evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that  the Opposite Parties have adopted unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by not making good the loss of the complainant as committed by deposing through different affidavits as mentioned above. In this regard, we are supported with the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 7543 of 2004 titled as M/s.National Seeds Corporation Limited Vs. M.Madhusudhan Reddy & Anr. Decided on 16 January, 2012.  

9.       Now come to the quantum of compensation. In his complaint, the complainant has sought the relief with prayer before this District Commission to direct the  Opposite Parties to  pay a sum of Rs.2,99,880/- due to shortage of 153 quintal paddy yield from 9 acres of land due to adulterated, sub standard and defective quality of seeds and also to pay Rs.1 lakh on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant besides costs of complaint amounting to Rs.22,000/-.

10.     It is not disputed that the yield of the paddy of the complainant remained 15 quintal per acre as per the committed yield of more than 32 quintal per acre. Perusal of the unrebutted ‘J’ form Ex.C6 produced by the complainant  shows that the complainant has sold 135 (360 bags packing 37.5 Kg) quintal of paddy (i.e. 15 quintal x 9 acres) @ Rs.1960/- amounting to Rs.2,64,600/-.  But on the other hand, the Opposite Parties have specifically admitted that the yield of the paddy per acre will be more than 32 quintal per acre and in this way, the    complainant suffered loss of 17 quintal per acre of 9 acre which comes to Rs.2,99,880/- @ Rs.1960/- per quintal. Moreover, we do not have any gold scale to measure the accurate loss occurred due to non germination of paddy seeds, so we have no option but to assess the loss as per the available material on the file. 

11.     In view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint is partly allowed and we direct the Opposite Parties jointly or severally to make good the loss of the complainant by paying a lump sum compensation of Rs.2,99,880/- (Rupees Two Lakh ninety nine thousands eight hundred eighty only) to the complainant  on account of loss of crop, mental tension and harassment as well as litigation expenses alongwith  interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 12.01.2022  till its  realization.  The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties jointly or severally  within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant  shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this District Commission. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

Announced in Open Commission.