Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/16/15

Narinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Brar Seed Store - Opp.Party(s)

M.S.Sethi Adv.

03 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

Consumer Complaint No. 15 of 04.01.2016

Date of Decision            :   03.06.2016

 

Narinder Singh aged 32 years s/o Sucha Singh r/o village & Post Office Pandhori Kad, Tehsil & District Hoshiarpur-146112.

….. Complainant

                                                         Versus

1.Brar Seed Store, Opp. P.A.U Gate No.1, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana-141001 through authorized signatory.

2.National Seed Corporation Ltd., Beej Bhawan, Pusa Complex, New Delhi-110012, through its authorized signatory.

3.Bharat Agro Overseas (India), A-64, Indl.Area, G.T.Karnal Road, Delhi-33 through its authorized signatory.

…Opposite parties

 

          (Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

QUORUM:

SH.G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

MRS. BABITA, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant                      :        Sh.M.S.Sethi, Advocate          

For OP1                         :        Ex-parte

OP2 and OP3                 :        Complaint already dismissed as withdrawn vide

                                               order dated 27.01.2016

 

PER G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

 

1.           Complainant, an uneducated farmer claims to be sowing 2 times different quality of crops in his fields in a year. Complainant  got 4  acres of land on rent at rate of Rs.40,000/- for 2015-2016 from Tarwinder Singh, Sucha Singh, Gurmeet Singh and Tarsem Singh in  village  Pandhori  Kad,   Hoshiarpur. For sowing the crops of peas in the month of September 2015, the complainant visited OP1 for purchase of best quality of seeds giving higher yield. Complainant was allured by OP1 to purchase AP-3 peas seeds because Op1    is the self producer of that seed. On representation of OP1, the complainant purchased 80kg Kavari AP-3 seeds of peas and 80kg of NSC Seeds of peas in packed and sealed bags for Rs.40,000/- vide bill No.23768 dated 22.09.2014 from him(OP1).Complainant sowed the entire purchased seeds of Kavari AP-   3 & NSC in the above referred 4 acres agricultural land @40kg per acre on 27.09.2015. Normally flowers to peas plants comes in 35-40 days after its sowing and thereafter, crop becomes ready after 50-55 days for harvesting in first phase, second and 3^rd phase. These phases surfaces with interval period of 7-    15 days. However, after sowing the seeds purchased by the complainant from OP1, only 35% of flowers emerged after period of more than 2 months. 55% to 60% plants were still having no sign of flower and length of the plant also  exceed excessively and it went higher as compared to normal process. Complainant claims to have suffered loss due to defective/spurious seeds supplied by OP1. Agriculture Department of Hoshiarpur after conduct of inspection dated 03.12.2015 submitted report that there is mixing of other seeds to the extent of 50% and it appears that mixture of seeds sold by the dealer. Horticulture Department after its further inspection conducted on 15.12.2015 stated through report dated 17.12.2015 that there was mixture of various kind of peas plants with height upto 4 feet. So, it is claimed as if instead of supplying of AP-3 variety, some other mid season and late season class peas of seeds were supplied. Owing to this, complainant suffered loss due to delay in sowing the 3^rd crop of the year. Thereafter, Chief Agriculture Officer, Hoshiarpur submitted report dated 17.12.2015 with Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur. Complainant kept the copy of the tag before handing over the same to the Chief Agriculture Officer, Hoshiapur. On the tag, it was recorded as if packed/sealed bags having quantity of 30kgs  each, but complainant purchased 80kg of AP-3 seeds of OP2 under these tag. Mix quality of AP-3 seeds supplied by the OP1 and as such, he  adopted an unfair trade practice. It is claimed that nexus of Op1 with other Ops cannot be ruled out. In case, the mixed seeds would not have been supplied, then complainant would have expected crops of 16 quintal by 22.11.2015 for earning Rs.1,12,000/- @70/- per kg. Even complainant was expecting further 16 quintal of production by 29.11.2015 for earning Rs.80,000/- @50/- per kg. In the 3^rd phase of production, complainant was expecting 8 quintal of production by 07.12.2015 for fetching Rs.24,000/- @30/- per kg. Due to supply of inferior quality of seeds by OP1, complainant compelled to destroy the crops resulting in huge loss. By pleading adoption of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of Ops, compensation of Rs.9 lac on account of suffered damages to the expected crops and Rs.5 lac on account of mental harassment, but Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses claimed.

2.                Complaint against OP2 and OP3 was withdrawn by counsel for the complainant on 27.1.2016 through recorded statement and that is why, the complaint against these Ops was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn.

3.                OP1 is ex-parte in this case.

4.                Complainant to prove his case tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CA1 along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C25 and CD  Ex.C26 and thereafter, his counsel closed the evidence.

5.                Written arguments not submitted, but oral arguments alone addressed and those were heard. Records gone through carefully.

6.                Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 are copies of statements of Gurmeet Singh, Tarsem Singh, Talwinder Singh and Sucha Singh for proving as if    complainant Sh.Narinder Singh fetched their 27 kanal of land on lease in area of village Pandhori Kad, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur. It is claim of the complainant put forth through affidavit Ex.CA1 that the seeds purchased by him from OP1 through Invoice Ex.C3 were sown by him in this land. These seeds were purchased by him at Ludhaina through Ex.C3 and as such, this Forum has jurisdiction.

7.                As per claim of the complainant, OP1 supplied the seeds of AP-3 variety with assurance that seeds will yield the bumper crops. However, that representation to the knowledge of OP1 was false and that is why the complainant claims to have suffered loss as referred above.

8.                Copy of Field Inspection Report Ex.C4 of Assistant Director of Agriculture Office, Hoshiarpur shows that seeds of peas purchased by the complainant through bill Ex.C3 were not of represented quality because 50% of seeds were of other qualities than the represented one. Through this report Ex.C4, it was reported as if dealer has mixed the seeds with other seeds, due to which, the shrubs of the crops could not be normal. Through report Ex.C5, Deputy Director Horticulture found as if shrubs of peas plants went goes to excessive length of 4 feet. In this report Ex.C5 of dated 17.12.2015, it is mentioned as if shrubs of peas have started giving fruits now. It is stated through this report Ex.C5 that due to improper quality of seeds, the further crops will be sown late by the complainant. Through report Ex.C6, it was reported by Horticulture Department  Hoshiarpur as if delay in sowing of wheat crops will took place because     height of the shrubs of peas was excessive to 4 feet. On submission of report Ex.C5 with Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, as disclosed by letter Ex.C7,   the Chief Agricultural Law Officer started taking action against OP1 and that is why, order Ex.C17 was passed for canceling the license of seeds of OP1. So, this documentary evidence available on record enough to establish as if seeds of peas sold by OP1 to the complainant was of mixed/inferior quality. That amounts to adoption of unfair trade practice.

9.                Copies of paper clippings Ex.C10 to Ex.C16 also produced on record to show that mixed seeds ruined peas crop in State of Punjab. Complainant even submitted complaint in Sangat Darshan, copy of which is produced on record as Ex.C18. Through letter Ex.C19, intimation was sent to the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana qua action taken on the basis of complaint of the complainant. Copy of action taken report even sent to the complainant by the Chief Agriculture Officer, Ludhiana as disclosed by report Ex.C20. Ex.C21 to Ex.C25 are other letters available on record to show that seeds sold by OP1 to the complainant was of inferior/mixed quality, due to which, action of cancellation of license took place.

10.              Though, complainant in his complaint has mentioned the expected loss in Para no.10, but no report of expert has been got produced to establish as to what actual loss suffered by the complainant. Report of expert alone could have established the amount of loss sustained by the complainant, due to sowing of poor/inferior quality of seeds supplied to him by Op1. As that report of expert is not there and as such, fitness of things require that OP1 should be directed to refund the price amount of Rs.40,000/- and even pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- for mental harassment, agony and loss caused to the complainant owing to delay in sowing the next crop.

11.              Therefore, as a sequel of the above discussion, complaint allowed in terms that OP1 will refund the price amount of Rs.40,000/- to the complainant and even compensation for mental harassment, agony and loss caused resulting in delay in sowing the next crop of amount of Rs.25,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.3000/- allowed in favour of the complainant and against OP1. Compliance of above said directions be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules.

12.                        File be indexed and consigned to record room.

                                                            

                      (Babita)                                     (G.K. Dhir)

            Member                                        President

Announced in Open Forum

Dated:03.06.2016

Gurpreet Sharma.