Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/137/2011

Ranbir Singh S/o Sat Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Haryana Seeds Developmenty Corporation Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Saini

23 Nov 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI.

                                                                                    Complaint No. 137 of 2011.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 17.02.2011

                                                                                    Date of decision: 23.11.2016.

Ranbir Singh aged about 35 years son of Shri Sat Pal, resident of village Safeelpur, Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                           

                                                                                                                    …Complainant.

                                    Versus

1. Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Limited, Near Deshi Liquor Vend, Sadhaura, Sub Tehsil Sadharua, Tehsil Bilaspur, Distt. Yamuna Nagar through its concerned official/Incharge.
2. Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Limited, Regd. & Head Office Bays No. 3-6, Sector-2, Panchkula, through its General Manager/M.D./Chair-person/ concerned officer.

                                                                                                       ...Respondents.  

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Surjeet Singh Saini, Advocate, counsel for complainant.  

              Sh. K.B.Mehta, Advocate, counsel for respondents.

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that the respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on account of loss due to less yield of the crop and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant purchased 10Kgs of pea seeds HFP-9426 T/L from the OP No.1 who is dealer as well as manufacturer of the seed in question for his ½ acre land vide bill No. 1180 dated 14.10.2010 for Rs. 950/-.  The complainant sown the said seeds in his ½ acre land as per instructions of the Ops by spending huge amount on cultivation etc. The seed in question is used as vegetables. The plants/ bels of pea crops increased in extraordinary way but no yield/produce was given by the said plants/ bels. Upon this, the complainant informed the Ops regarding the loss caused to the complainant due to the sale of inferior quality of the pea seeds but the OPs refused to accede the genuine request of the complainant and further misbehaved with him. The complainant had spent a huge amount of Rs. 16,250/- on the cultivation of the abovesaid pea crop, besides this the ½ acre land of the complainant remained vacant and the complainant was not able to earn anything for a season from his ½ acre land and suffered a loss of Rs. 50,000/- on this account. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; complaint is not maintainable; complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by his own act and conduct; there is no negligence or deficiency in service; complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and on merit it has been admitted that complainant purchased 10 Kgs. pea HFP 9426 TL seed vide memo No. 1180/40 through HSDC Sales counter Sadhaura, District Yamuna Nagar. Thereafter, the complainant moved an application alleging therein that the pea seeds so purchased by him was of poor quality and upon this the Manager of the OPs Department alongwith Sh. Anup Singh ASPO HSDC, Yamuna Nagar had conducted inspection of the field of the complainant on 15.02.2011 and during this inspection it was observed by the inspecting officer that complainant had neither followed the instructions imparted to him nor he had used proper insecticides and the allegations contained in the complaint were found baseless and incorrect. Copy of report of inspection team dated 15.02.2011 is enclosed herewith for kind perusal of this Forum.  The OP had constituted a committee comprising of Dr. Taya Sr. Scientist, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Damla, Sh. Raj Kumar Rana, Technical Assistant of District Horticulture Office, Yamuna Nagar and Sh. S.P. Kapil Assistant Seed Production Officer, HSDC, Yamuna Nagar for carrying out the inspection of the field of complainant and abovesaid committee inspected the filed of the complainant on 21.2.2011 and after conducting thorough inspection, the abovesaid committee had concluded that the allegations leveled by the complainant are baseless. Copy of the report of the committee dated 21.02.2011 is enclosed for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Forum.  It has been further mentioned that the sale counter of the OPs had sold the pea seeds of the said quality to the various farmers but not a single complaint regarding the poor quality was ever received in the office of the OPs. The OPs department has also got tested the lot of seeds of the above mentioned quality from Seeds Testing Laboratory, Umari which was found up to the satisfactory standard of all the quality by the laboratory and on merit it has been stated that this variety of seed is for matured peas and not for greeny/ unripped peas and this fact has already been elaborately explained by the inspection committee in its report dated 21.02.2011. Rest contents of the complaint were controverted and reiterated the stand taken in the preliminary objections. Lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint.                              

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW/A and documents such as photo copy of bill No. 1180 dated 14.10.2010 as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of jamabandi for the year 2005-06 as Annexure C-2, Photographs of crop as Annexures C-3 to C-14, Negatives of photographs as Annexure C-15 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Raj Pal Singh, Manager as Annexure RW/A  and documents such as Authority letter as Annexure R-1, Photo copy of Seed Testing Laboratory Inspection Report Umri as Annexure R-2, Photo copy of Test report of Seed Testing Laboratory, Karnal as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of Inspection report of field as Annexure R-4, Photo copy of report of Committee of Agriculture department as Annexure R-5, Photo copy of letter dated 23.3.2011 as Annexure R-6, Photo copy of certificate issued by Manager HSDC Radaur as Annexure R-7 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

7.                     The only version of the complainant is that plants/bels of the peas crop increased in extraordinary way but no yield/produce has been given by the said plants/bels and due to that complainant spent huge amount on cultivation etc. and suffered financial loss. Learned counsel for the complainant draw our attentions towards the purchase bill Annexure C-1 and Fard Jamabandi Annexure C-2 and also photographs Annexure C-3 to C-14 and requested for acceptance of complaint.

8.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the Ops argued at length that the complainant has filed a false complaint just to extract money from the OPs whereas no truth is attached with the allegation mentioned in the complaint. Learned counsel for the OPs draw our attentions towards the seed testing laboratory inspection report Annexure R-2 and argued that as per report of the Seed Testing Laboratory Umri District Kurukshetra as well as report of seed Analyst State Seed Testing Laboratory Karnal Annexure R-3, the seed in question was upto standard. Learned counsel for the OPs further draw our attentions towards the report of committee Annexure R-4 and R-5 wherein also it has been specifically mentioned that the crop of the pea seeds  was standing in a good condition and having full growth with fruit. Further, it has also been mentioned in the report Annexure R-4 and R-5 that the farmer has made a false complaint and no truth is attached with the allegations mentioned in the complaint. Learned counsel for the OPs further draw our attentions towards the report of local commissioner appointed by this Forum vide its order dated 17.02.2011 who submitted his report vide serial No. 191 dated 29.04.2011 on 02.05.2011 and argued that as per report of local commissioner also complainant has not suffered any loss due to the poor quality of the seed in question. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

9.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs as the complainant has totally failed to prove that the seed purchased by him was of inferior quality and further he has suffered any financial loss due to the said seed purchased from the OPs. Mere filing of copy of bill and fard jamabandi, it cannot be presumed that complainant has suffered any financial loss. After going through the reports of the inspection committee in which Dr. Taya Sr. Scientist, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Damla, Sh. Raj Kumar Rana, Technical Assistant of District Horticulture Office, Yamuna Nagar and Sh. S.P. Kapil Assistant Seed Production Officer, HSDC, Yamuna Nagar were member of the committee and report of the local commissioner appointed by this Forum, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the present complaint filed by the complainant. Hence, we have no option except to dismiss the present complaint.

10                    Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court. 23.11.2016.          

                                                                               (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

                               (S.C.SHARMA)

                                MEMBER