Haryana

Kurukshetra

52/2018

Naseeb Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharat Beej - Opp.Party(s)

Balwinder Singh

22 Apr 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint no. 52 of 2018.

Date of instt. 07.03.2018. 

                                                                        Date of Decision: 15.04.2019.

 

Naseeb Singh @ Mohan Lal, aged 51 years, son of Sh. Neki Ram, resident of village Tigri Khalsa, P.O. Amin, District Kurukshetra. 

                                                                ……….Complainant.      

                        Versus

 

1. Bharat Beej Bhandar, near Subji Mandi Chowk, Salarpur Road, Kurukshetra through its proprietor.

 

2. Manufacturer company, Particulars to be disclosed by the OP no.1.

..………Opposite parties.

 

       Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                Ms. Neelam, Member. 

                Sh. Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member                                          

Present:     Sh. Balwinder Singh Kamoda, Advocate for complainant. 

 Opposite party no.1 exparte.

 

           

ORDER

                                                                         

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Naseeb Singh against Bharat Beej Bhandar, the opposite party.

2.             It is stated in the complaint that complainant is an agriculturist. He had purchased one liter advent and one liter contact plus pesticides used for removal of insects for spraying it in his fields at village Tigri Khalsa vide bill No.14 dated 17.9.2017 from a sum of Rs.731/- from opposite party. That op had fully assured the complainant that the aforesaid medicine is of best quality and the insects will be completely removed from the crop. It is further averred that complainant sprayed the said insecticide in his two acres of paddy crop as per the instructions given by the op and as written on the packet in order to save it from the insects. But after 5-6 hours of spraying it on the paddy crop, the paddy crop started damaging and the total crop was damaged. That the complainant firstly informed the op and requested him to do something in the matter, but he lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other and then the complainant approached the Agriculture Department, Kurukshetra to visit the fields of the complainant and to make report why the paddy crop was damaged. It is further averred that on 27.10.2017, a joint team of Agriculture department, Kurukshetra visited the fields of complainant and made their report specifically mentioning therein that 90-95% of the crop has been damaged due to some un-identified chemical spray and it is clear that the product sold to the complainant was defective. It is further averred that when the team visited the shop of the op for getting sample of the spray, he told that stock of the spray is not available to him now. That total crop of about Rs.40,000/- of the complainant has been damaged and has also spent amount on his crops. He has been put to harassment and mental tension by the op. That the complainant approached the op again and requested him either to pay compensation for the damages or to get it paid from the concerned company, but the op has refused to pay the same. Hence, this complaint.

2.             On notice, opposite party no.1 failed to appear and was proceeded against exparte. Op no.1 has also failed to disclose the name of the manufacturer of the insecticide.

3.             The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5.

4.             We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have perused the case file carefully.

5.             The complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A wherein he has testified all the facts so set out by him in his complaint. He has also placed on file cash/ credit memo Ex.C1 from which it is evident that complainant purchased the insecticides in question from opposite party no.1 for a sum of Rs.731.60 on 17.9.2017. The complainant has also placed on file photograph to show that paddy crop was damaged after spray of the insecticides. The complainant has also placed on file copy of inspection report Ex.C4 wherein the team of experts of the agricultural department have reported that at the spot 90 to 95% of paddy crop in two acres was found damaged and it seems that crop has been damaged due to spray of un-identified chemical and the samples of the insecticides could not be taken due to non availability of the stock with the shopkeeper. The evidence led by the complainant goes as unchallenged and unrebutted as the op no.1 has opted to proceed against exparte and has also failed to furnish the particulars of the manufacturer of the insecticide. So, it is proved on record that paddy crop of the complainant in two acres of land was damaged due to defective spray supplied by opposite party which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of op. The complainant has claimed that his crop of Rs.40,000/- has been damaged and in our view the complainant is entitled to the said amount from opposite party Bharat Beej Bhandar.

6.             In view of the above, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the complainant for the damage caused to his crop within a period of 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum from the date of order till actual realization. We also direct the op to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment including litigation expenses. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.     

Announced in open court:

Dt.: 22.4.2019 

                                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Neelam)           (Sunil Mohan Trikha)        

                Member                     Member