BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.            

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 171 of 2012                                                                        

                                                         Date of Institution         :    27.8.2012

                                                          Date of Decision   :     25.5.2016

1. Satvir Singh.  2.  Shankar Lal,

…sons of Sh.Birbal Ram, rs/o village Mahamadpuria, tehsil Rania Distt. Sirsa.

                      ……Complainant.

                                      Versus.

1. Haryali Kisan Bazar, Opp. Mohta Nursing Home, Jiwan Nagar Road, Rania, Distt. Sirsa  through its Manager Vikram s/o Sh.Tansukh Ram Duassad (Jaat), r/o village Mahamadpuria, tehsil Rania Distt. Sirsa.

2. Vikram s/o Sh.Tansukh Ram Duassad (Jaat), r/o village Mahamadpuria, tehsil Rania Distt. Sirsa, Manager of  Haryali Kisan Bazar, Opp. Mohta Nursing Home, Jiwan Nagar Road, Rania, Distt. Sirsa

  ...…Opposite parties.

                      Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SH.S.B.LOHIA …………PRESIDENT

                 SH.RAJIV MEHTA……         ..MEMBER.

Present:       Sh.A.K.Gupta Advocate for complainant.

     Sh.K.R.Jindal , Advocate for Opposite parties.

ORDER

                   Case of the complainant, in brief is that the complainants are  agriculturists.  The complainant  upon the assurances and representations given  by Op no.2 regarding the cheap and better quality seeds less than the market rate of cotton,  made bookings for the purchase of 143 units of seeds vide receipts no.8015, 8113, 8014 and 8112 by depositing a sum of Rs.18100/-. The delivery of said seeds was to be made before 31.3.2012. But neither the delivery of seeds was given nor advance amount was returned to the complainants by the opposite parties. The complainants purchased the seeds from the market at higher rates and suffered loss of less yielding due to late sowing of the seeds.  The complainants also moved an application on 5.6.2012 to the deputy Director, Agriculture, Sirsa, who got enquired the matter from S.D.A.O and it was found that the opposite parties wrongly got the advance booking as they were not having any authority to sell the seeds before 2.4.2012. Hence, the present complaint for return of advance amount Rs.1,18,000/- alongwith compensation for harassment, humiliation and litigation expenses etc.

2.                Opposite parties by filing their joint reply contested the case, wherein they pleaded that no sale was made to the complainants on 20.1.2012 or prior to 2.4.2012 of BT cotton seed variety.  The said booking of BT cotton seed was made from the complainants subject to the condition that any sale to them shall be subject to the permission of Director Agriculture to be granted to the Marketing Company. The sale permission was received on 2.4.2012 and the complainants were immediately contacted telephonically by the opposite parties to lift the booked quantity by making the balance payment and the complainants failed to do so and they were also sent the registered letter dt. 16.5.2012 informing them to lift the booked quantity by making balance payment on or before 20.5.2012, failing which the booking amount shall stand forfeited as per the terms and conditions of the advance booking.  No loss was caused to the complainants as the sowing of BT cotton variety of seeds is done from 15^th April to June.

3.                In order to make out his case,  the complainants have placed on record various documents i.e. Ex.CW/A1 and Ex.CW2/A-their own supporting affidavits; and Ex.C2 to Ex.C11; whereas the respondents have tendered Ex.RW1/A-affidavit of Sh.Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Deputy Manager.

4.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard  learned counsel for the parties.

5.                There is no dispute regarding the advance bookings of the seeds vide receipts Ex.C2 to Ex.C5. The controversy between the parties is that the opposite parties were not liable to make advance booking of the seed without sale permission of the authorities. Bare perusal of inspection report Ex.C7 shows that the opposite parties were given the permission for sale of seeds on 2.4.2012 and they were not any right to sale the said seed against the terms and conditions of the agricultural authorities.  The bookings were made in January 2011, which are quite illegal and against  the sale permission. The opposite parties have not placed on record anything to show that they were having any right to make the advance bookings from the farmers. Due to delay in delivery of the seed, the complainant had to purchase the seed from the market. Thus, in our view, the complainant is entitled for refund of said advance payment.

6.                Resultantly, the present complaint is allowed to the extent that the complainant is entitled for refund of said advance amount i.e. Rs.18100/- from the opposite parties with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 27.8.2012 till payment. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days. Both the opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable to make the compliance of this order. File be consigned to record after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                           President,

Dated:                                                                  District Consumer Disputes

                                              Member.                Redressal Forum, Sirsa.