BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: MEWAT AT NUH.

                                                                                                                                    Consumer complaint No.11
                                                                                                                                    Date of Institution: 18.09.2015
                                                                                                                                    Date of Order: 26.07.2016

Issaaq Khan son of Juhar Khan, resident of village Rithora, Tehsil Nuh, District Mewat.

                                                                                                                 ….Complainant.

                                 Versus

1. Salesman Indrish, Agriculture Department, Nuh.

2. Ramesh Malik, A.S.P.O., Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Ltd., Agriculture Department, Pataudi.

3. Deepak Sharma, A.S.P.O.,  Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Ltd., Agriculture Department, Pataudi.

                                                                                                              …. Opposite parties.

                                     
     Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

BEFORE     Mr.Rajbir Singh Dahiya, President.
                  Mrs.Urmil Beniwal, Member.

Present:      Complainant in person.
                  Mr.Imran Khan, Advocate for the opposite parties.

ORDER       R.S. DAHIYA, PRESIDENT.
              
1.        Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant-Issaaq Khan son of Juhar Khan resident of village Rithora Tehsil Nuh District Mewat purchased three bags of HD-2967 wheat seeds on 04.11.2014 from the opposite party and sowed the same in his three acre land and because of paucity of  seeds he also sowed some old seeds lying at his house.  However, after some days only 5-6% seeds had grown up despite the fact that he had properly irrigated the fields. As the seeds of Haryana Seeds Corporation Ltd.-a Government undertaking were of poor quality, the same could not grow up whereas the seeds used from his house had grown up.  In this regard, complaint was made to Sales man of Haryana Seeds Corporation Ltd. on which two officers from Pataudi were deputed to check the quality of seeds and those officers also admitted the fact of poor quality of seeds and said that they would send his complaint to Chandigarh and he would be provided adequate compensaton.  They noted down their report on a paper. However, they had not affixed any seal etc. on the same and on his asking they put their signatures on it and went away.  However, when he got the said paper read from some one then it transpired that they had gone away after recording his statement.  The officers of Agriculture Department asked him to again sow the seeds.  On this, he again sowed the seeds lying at his house but as the appropriate time of irrigation had gone and there was no moisture in soil so nothing could grow up.  They were required to submit their report in writing. This episode was also published in newspapers.  Cutting of newspaper was enclosed.  Even after 10 months he had not been given even a single penny.  He visited their office time and again but only assurance was given to him.   Usually, there is production of about Rs.1,50,000/-in his three acre land.  However, due to poor quality of seeds no production has taken place in this season.   He had also spent approximately Rs.35,000/-in the process of sowing seeds, fertilizers, irrigations etc.  Due to poor quality of seeds provided by H.S.D.C. he has suffered a lot of financial loss and mental agony.  He had moved a written complaint to the Deputy Commissioner but no action has been taken so far.  A copy of letter of Deputy Director, Agriculture Department is enclosed.  So by way of this complaint, he has claimed Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation alongwith Rs.35,000/- incurred by him on cultivation etc.

2.         On registration of the complaint, notices to the opposite parties were issued by registered post and the opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed reply taking the plea that on 04.11.2014, three bags of wheat seeds were purchased by the complainant from Haryana Seeds Department, duly approved and certified by the Haryana State Seeds Certifying Agency but the technique and method of cultivation of the fields of the complainant was not good.  It is further pleaded that on 15.11.2014, after inspecting the fields of the complainant, the agriculture officers found that the fields of the complainant were lacking moisture and the seeds were sown at very deep level.  Only 20-25% germination took place and remaining  seeds could not be germinated and this happened because of some dry soil and sowing of the seed in depth against the parameters.  The complainant further took the plea that the complaint of the complainant was redressed on the same date in the presence of the complainant.  It is further mentioned that the seed in question belonged to lot No.April 14.07.06-49(i)  and report dated 15.11.2014 is enclosed herewith.  There is no deficiency on the part of the opposite parties.  The complaint of the complainant is based on false and wrong facts which is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3.              As regards the evidence produced by both the parties, some documents produced by complainant are purchase bills of the seed Mark 'A' and a self prepared inspection report allegedly signed by one Ramesh Malik, ASPO, HSDC, Pataudi Mark 'B' dated 15.11.2014, Newspaper cutting which is Mark 'C' and Certificate affixed on the seed bags which are marked as 'D' to 'F' and certification logos mark 'G' and 'H' and enquiry report of Deputy Director.  The opposite parties have filed their affidavits in their evidence and filed inspection report dated 15.11.2014 Mark-1 duly signed by Ramesh Malik, certificate of HSDC, Sirsa regarding the quality of seed Mark R-2, Sale receipt Mark R-3 alongwith reply.
4.        The only document of some importance filed by the complainant as Mark-'B' is a self prepared document and does not tally with the report of Mark R-1. Both mark 'B' and Mark R-1 are signed by the complainant and the report Mark R-1 is counter signed by Ramesh Malik, ASPO, Pataudi is not correct.  There are four signatures of Ramesh Malik one on Mark R-1, two on his affidavit and one on the Vakalatnama which do not tally with the signatures on Mark 'B'.  A naked eye shall find the difference in the signatures on Mark 'B' and the rest.  This document  prepared by the complainant is not a inspection report.  Infact, the actual inspection report is Mark R-1.  Hence, Mark 'B' is a fake document and cannot be relied upon.
5.        After hearing the arguments and going through the evidence produced by both the parties, it comes out that there was only 25% growth of the seed  and some portion was in the process of germination, as claimed by the opposite parties.  This happened because of some dry soil and sowing of the seed in depth against the parameters.
6.        The farmer was also provided with extra seed of which complainant made no reference.
7.         All the enquiries made by the respective authorities do not support the contention of the complainant to entitle him to relief from this Forum.  The complainant has concocted Mark 'B' and suppressed the fact of getting extra seed and whether it was utilized by the complainant or not.
8.        The documents produced & relied upon by complainant are neither here nor there and cannot be taken as convincing proof of allegations.  The complainant is evidently an illiterate farmer and he did not have the services of a lawyer.  The entire matter is to be appreciated keeping this background in view.
9.        Mark B is nothing but statement of the complainant.  The report of the agriculture officers was that some seeds were under germination and the reason was that the seeds were sown too deep.  Even illiterate farmers know, by experience, how deep the seeds are to be sown.  It is case of the opposite parties that extra bags of wheat seeds were supplied to the complainant.
10.        The complainant has failed to prove that the seeds supplied by H.S.D.C. were entirely below the required standard.  There must have been something lapse on part of complainant himself.
11.        However, the fact remains that something was wrong with the quality of seeds supplied.  Complainant must have spent on irrigation, labour & fertilisers.  We are therefore of the opinion that ends of justice shall be met if the opposite party-H.S.D.C. is directed to pay compensation @ Rs.10,000/- per acre totalling Rs.30,000/- and it is ordered accordingly.  Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receiving the copy of this order.
                    Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to record room after doing needful.  This order of the Forum is running into 5 pages in total and each and every page of this order has been signed.

Announced in open Court.
26.07.2016

(Urmil Beniwal)                                                                                                                  (Rajbir Singh Dahiya)
    (Member)                                                                                                                               President,
                                                                                                                                        District Consumer Disputes 
                                                                                                                                       RedressalForum,Mewat at Nuh