NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2665/2009

M/S. JAI BHARAT SEEDS COMPANY - Complainant(s)

Versus

BASAU RAM & ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. JINENDRA JAIN & ASSOCIATES

27 Aug 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 22 Jul 2009

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/2665/2009
(Against the Order dated 24/03/2009 in Appeal No. 348/2009 of the State Commission Haryana)
1. M/S. JAI BHARAT SEEDS COMPANYThrough Its Partner Sh. gobind Goyal 225-B. New Grain Market Hisar Tehsil and Distt. Hisar ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. BASAU RAM & ORS.S/o. Popal Ram. R/o. Village Jandli Kalan. Tehsil and Fatehabad 2. M/S. PRAVEEN TRADING COMPANY. Through Its Proprietor .31-a, Anaj Mandi Bhuna Tehsil and District Fatehabad ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :M/S. JINENDRA JAIN & ASSOCIATES
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 27 Aug 2009
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

          This order shall dispose of Revision Petitions No.2664-2666 of 2009 and 2758 of 2009.  Facts are being taken from Revision Petition No.2758/2009.

          Petitioner was the producer of the seeds BH-393.  Briefly stated, the facts are that the respondents/complainants purchased Barley seeds of BH-393 variety from the trading company, respondent no.2, which were produced by the petitioner.  The seeds were sown by the respondents in their fields but the crop of barley did not go as per the standard assured by the petitioner.   They made a complaint to the Agriculture Department.  Agriculture officials observed that the barley produce was 55% to 60% less.  Sample of seed of BH-393 was sent to Haryana Agriculture University, Hisar for testing and it was opined that the seeds were not of BH-393 type. 

Aggrieved by this, respondents filed a complaint before the District Forum which was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.14,400/- by way of compensation, Rs.2000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs.1000/- as costs.


-3-

          Aggrieved against the order passed by the District Forum, petitioner filed appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

            We agree with the view taken by the foras below as against the expert opinion given by the Haryana Agriculture University, petitioner has not filed any other expert opinion.  In view of the report given by Haryana Agriculture University, Hisar and the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Limited Vs. Sadhu & Anr. 2005 (2) Supreme 169”  no interference is called for in the order passed by the foras below.  Revision petitions are dismissed.



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER