West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/81/2012

Chitta Ranjan Mondal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Benu Mondal - Opp.Party(s)

12 Jun 2012

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum

 

Paschim Medinipur.

 

                                       ORDER SHEET

 

            Complaint Case No……81/2012……………..

 

 

                                                                                  Chitta Ranjan Mondal

                       ………………………………………………………………………………Complainant.

 

                                                                                            -     Vs.  –

                                                                                    Benu Mondal & others

                                       …………………………………………………………………………………Op / Ops.

                          

             Order No. 3                                                                                                           Dated 12.06.12                                            

 

              The complainant is present.  The case is taken up for hearing on the point of admission.  Complainant files some documents as per firisti.  Let the documents be kept with the record.  Hd.the complainant.  Perused the petition of complaint and the documents filed.  Considered. 

               The present petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant claiming total compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs.  The main contention of the complaint is that he purchased some tomato seeds for thepurpose of growing seedlings and cultivation of tomato.  But he did not get the desire result.  Some of the seedlings were not properly grown and he suffered a huge loss for the defective seeds.  From the copy of the documents filed today it appears that the District Officer F.P.I. & H, Paschim Medinipur has certified that the prevailing weather condition was not suitable to all varieties of tomato cultivated in the area in question and that it was difficult to asses the variety as the plants were almost in non-bearing stage.  He has further stated in his report that the non-bearing condition may happen due to selection of wrong variety which is unsuitable for cultivation in the Summer Season.  The complainant also filed a certificate from one Debasis Tripathi wherefrom; it appears that the variety of tomato was not suitable for cultivation in the Summer Season.  Therefore, on the face of record and the documents filed by  the complainant himself.  We find that it was the complainant who made his choice of wrong variety of tomato for cultivation in the wrong season and on the face of the record and the documents placed before us we find that this is not a fit case for admission.

          Hence, the case is not admitted.                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                                         

                                         Sd/-                                Sd/-                                           Sd/-

                                     Member                         Member                                   President