THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.: 207 of 2013.
Date of Institution: 11.4.2013.
Date of Decision: 09-09-2015.
Sumer Singh son of Shri Bhim Singh, resident of village Gopalwas, tehsil Behal, district Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
- Bhawani & Brothers ( Certified Seeds, Pesticides and Urea Seller), New Bus Stand, Behal, district Bhiwani.
- Vibha Agrotech Ltd. 501, Subham Sirisampada, Plot No.6-3-1090/A/1, Raj Bhawan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, 82, through Managing Director/Authorized Signatureee.
…...OPs.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 AND 13 OF
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Shri Balraj Singh, Member
Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member
Present:- Shri Anand Dhayal, Adv. for complainant
Shri Anil Tanwar, Advocate for Ops.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he had purchased 300 Gms. Of Ribhi Vibha Wheat Crop Seed for a sum of Rs.12300/- and 500 ML Colonor Medicine for a sum of Rs.140/- from OP No.1 manufactured by OP No.2 vide cash Memo No.197 dated 29.11.2012. The complainant further alleged that OP No.1 told that the Wheat Crop Seed sold by him was superior quality and there was maximum production of wheat crop. It is further alleged that the seeds were sown properly as per agricultural norms in his cultivable land and he also put the area of two bags in his land. The further case of the complainant is that the growth of the above said Wheat crops was not up to the mark and the plants grown up in the fields on account of low quality of seeds sold by respondent No.1. The complainant further alleged that he approached the respondents to get tested the crop from the officers of Agriculture department at Bhiwani and they assured to get inspected the same but despite several visits they did not pay any heed. The complainant further alleged that due to poor quality of seed sold by the respondents, he had to suffer huge financial losses and as such he is entitled for compensation. The complainant further alleged that he requested the respondents to compensate for the loss but they flatly refused to accede the demand. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such, he has to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.He
2. On appearance, the opposite parties have filed the contested written statement and took preliminary objections qua maintainability; estoppel; locus standi; cause of action; suppression of true and material facts. On merits, it is alleged that opposite party No.1 has supplied only branded product/seeds in properly sealed bags/packets which is prepared by OP No.2 as per Seed Act and Rules and packed as per instructions of the Govt. It is further alleged that complainant had never tried to call the experts and never tried inspect the field from the Agriculture Scientists nor produced any report to prove that the seed sown by the complainant was inferior quality It is further alleged that the opposite parties have never given any assurance regarding production 30 quintals 20 kilograms wheat crops. It is further alleged that the complainant has not produced any relevant record that he is possessing 12 acres of agriculture land in village Gopalwas tehsil Behal, district Bhiwani It is further submitted that the complainant has not alleged that on which period he has sown the wheat crop seed. It is further alleged that the complainant has not suffered any financial losses and as such, he is not entitled for any compensation. Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondents and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against answering respondents.
3. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure C1 Bill/cash Memo Annexure C2 Photostat copy of undertaking by various farmers and Annexure C3 copy of letter along with Inspection Report and supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record Annexure R1& R2 Photostat copies of letters and Annexure R3 Photostat copy of bill along with supporting affidavit.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. In support of his contention he referred the inspection report Annexure C3 given by Dy. Director Agriculture, Bhiwani
7. Learned counsel for Opposite Parties reiterated the contents of their reply. In support of his contention he referred the instructions of Director of Agriculture, Haryana issued vide Memo No.52-70 dated 3.2.2002 to all the Dy. Directors Agriculture, Haryana Annexure R2. He submitted that the inspection of the fields must be conducted by a committee constituted as per the instructions comprising two officers of Agriculture Department, representative of seed agency and scientists of KGK/KUK, HAU to furnish their report, inspection of the seed/crop after inspections of the fields of the farmers. But in the instant case, the report has been submitted by the Dy. Director, Agriculture and in view of the said Circular of Govt. of Haryana the said report is not admissible. He further submitted that the sowing period of the seed advised by the Ops is between 15 October to 14 November but the complainant had purchased the seed on 29.11.2012 and thus he has not observed the sowing period for the seeds. The report of the Dy. Director Agriculture Annexure C3 thus not mentioned about the quality of the seed and same has been prepared inclusion with the complainant. In support of his contention he referred judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.2602 of 2008 decided on 12.2.2014 titled as Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd. Versus Garapati Srinivas Rao & Otrs.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties we have examined the relevant material on record. Admittedly, the complainant has purchased seed from OP No.1 vide receipt dated 29.11.2012 Annexure C1. Undisputably, the production of every aspect depends upon various factors viz. condition of climate, soil moisture, application of fertilizers, quality of seed, period of sowing, way and time of irrigation.
9. Under the provision of Section 13(1) (c ), where the complainant/consumer alleges the defect in the goods then the same be sent to the appropriate laboratory for the analysis for test of goods to find out whether the said goods suffer from any defect as alleged. But in the instant case no such test/analysis of the seed has been got done by the complainant in support of his contention.
10. The Dy. Director Agriculture has submitted report Annexure C3 on the instruction of this District Forum. He has mentioned in his report Annexure C3 little bit low production of the crop in the fields on the basis of average production in the area.
11. Taking in to account the relevant facts and the circumstances of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and award Rs.10,000/- lump sum as compensation to the complainant and against the Ops. 20% award amount shall be payable by OP No.1 and remaining 80% amount of the award shall be payable by OP No.2.Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 9-9-2015. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Ansuya Bishnoi), (Balraj Singh),
Member. Member
