Karnataka

Gadag

CC/60/2016

Shivappa.B.Bolashetty - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director, Kaveri Seeds Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

S.K.Patil

22 Oct 2020

ORDER

-::O R D E R::-

 

BY: SRI.B.S.KERI, MEMBER.

 

1.       The complainant has filed this complaint claiming direction to the OPs to pay compensation amount of Rs.3,22,276/- and Rs.10,000/- to each complainants towards mental and interest @ 18% p,a from the date of purchase of seeds till realization and cost of Rs.10,000/- and such other relief.

 

-::Brief facts of the case are as under::-

2.       The case of the complainants is that, they are the agriculturists and are depending on the avocation of agriculture.  It is further submitted that, in the month of October/November and December-2014, complainants purchased “Kaveri Champ, Research Hybrid Sun Flower Seeds” from OP No.6 produced and marketed by OP No.1.  It is submitted that, on the seeds bag, it is printed as, truthful label, physical purity minimum 98, Genetic purity minimum 95%.  The Government of Karnataka had an agreement with OP No.1 and seeds have been supplied through OP No.5 i.e., the Distributor to OP No.6, the seeds purchased by the complainants are certified by the Government.  It is further submitted that, In Nargund Taluk, OP No.1 sold 111 Quintals of “Kaveri Champ, Research Hybrid Sun Flower Seeds” through Raitha Samparka Kendra and also from some private Agro Centers including OP No.6.  It is further submitted that, after purchasing the above said seeds, complainants have sown them in their respective lands in the Month of November and December-2014 by giving manures, DAP, Urea and Potash and taken all the keen interest for the growth of crop.  Complainants have sprayed pesticides for 3-4 times and took all safety measures to get good yield.  Complainants have incurred expenses of Rs.16,000/- per acre including manures and pesticides.  The sunflower is a crop of four months.  It is further submitted that, in the first week of March-2015, complainants noticed that, in the tassel, there were no seeds and the entire crop was failed due to defective seeds.  Complainants immediately approached OP No.4 on 03.03.2015 to inspect their respective lands and to give compensation of Rs.45,000/- per acre for the loss caused due to defective seeds.  Complainants made hunger strike before the office of OP No.4, the media and press people took the interview of the complainants and other affected farmers and published in media and newspapers.  The Tahasildar, Nargund reported the matter to OP No.1 and 3.  OP No.3 issued a complaint to the Director of UAS, Dharwad for inspection of the affected irrigated and non-irrigated lands of complainants in Nargund and Konnur Hobli.  The Scientists by name C.M. Rafi, Basavarajappa. M.P and others visited the lands of complainants and affected lands on 07.03.2015 and inspected, they gave a report that, the sunflower crop flowering was nearing completion and in almost all the fields sterile plants were noticed and sterile plants observed is beyond the permissible limit of seed certification standards of Hybrid sunflower and opined that, the sunflower seeds supplied are of poor quality and no pest and disease incidence were noticed in the lands and it is very clear that, there is a failure of sunflower crop due to defective seeds. 

It is further submitted that, the details of purchase of seeds, survey numbers, area of sowing, expense of agricultural operations and loss of yield etc., are as detailed below:

Sl. No.	Name of Farmer	R.S No.	Name of Agro Centre, Bill No. and Date	Month of Sowing	Expenses and Fertilizer	Loss of yield Rate Rs.3,300/- per quintal	Total Loss
1	Shivappa S/o Bharamappa Bolashetti	i)RSN 41 2A-31G     ii) RSN 139/1 4A-07G	i) R-6 071 05.12.14     ii) R-6 1789 08.12.14	Dec-14     Dec-14	Rs.44,400     Rs.66,800	i)25.17 Quintal (Rs.84,200)   ii) 38 Quintal Rs.1,26,840	Rs.1,28,600       Rs.1,93,676
						Total	Rs.3,22,276

    

The complainants purchased the above said seeds from OP No.6       and sown them in their respective lands by spending huge amount.  Due to defective seeds they incurred heavy loss.  In the month of March-April-2015, there was a very good rate of Rs.3,300-00 to 3,500-00 per quintal and demand for sunflower crop.  If the seeds purchased by the complainants are genuine, the complainants would have got yield of Rs.9-10 Quintals per acre.  Complainants are the consumers of OP No.1 to 6 as OP No.1 is the manufacturer of “Kaveri Champ, Research Hybrid Sun Flower Seeds” and OP No.5 is the Distributor and OP No.6 is the Dealer and OP No.2 to 4 are the officers through whom seeds are certified and distributed.  Hence, all the OPs are responsible for the loss and damage caused to the complainants.  The complainants incurred total loss as detailed below:

S. No.	Name of complainant/farmer	Total Loss
i)	Shivappa S/o Bharamappa Bolashetti	i) Rs.1,28,600 ii) Rs.1,93,676
	Total	Rs.3,22,276

 

Complainants approached OP No.4 on 03.03.2015 and gave representation in writing and also approached OP No.6 and made all efforts and brought to the notice about failure of sunflower crop due to defective seeds.  Even on 29.04.2015 farmers including complainants more than 2000 farmers gave application to Tahasildar, Nargund for compensation for failure of crop due to supply of defective seeds and deficiency in service on the part of OPs.  Complainants got issued legal notice to OPs on 18.05.2015.  OP No.1 and 5 replied by admitting that, complainants have purchased the seeds from their company, but rest of the complaint are false.  OP No.2 to 4 and 6 have not replied to the legal notice.  The cause of action arose to file this complaint on November-December 2014, when the complainants purchased the Kaveri Champ Seeds from OP No.6 of OP No.1 and 5 and subsequently on 07.03.2015 when complainants received report of Scientists that, the seeds are defective and also on 18.05.2015 when complainants issued legal notice.   Hence, the OPs are liable to pay compensation amount of Rs.3,22,276/- and Rs.10,000/- to each complainants towards mental agony and interest @ 18% p,a from the date of purchase of seeds till realization and cost of Rs.10,000/- and such other relief.

3.       Registered the complaint and notice was ordered, as such OP No.2 to 5 present before the Forum and filed their respective written version.  OP No.1 and 6 remained absent.  The contents of written version filed by the OP No.2 to 5 are as follows.

Written Version of the OP No.2 to 4

4.       The OP No.2 to 4 contended that, the complainant filed by the complainants are not true and correct and this complaint is not tenable either in law or on facts.  They are wrongly made as party to this complaint and therefore, they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainants, but it is not true that, the Government of Karnataka had agreement with OP No.1.  OP No.1 approached the Government with all reports and certifications of the seeds and by looking to all the facts, the seeds are certified to supply to farmers through Raita Samparka Kendra.  It is also true that, the complainants and other farmers approached OP No.4 on 03.03.2015 to inspect their respective lands and to give compensation for the loss caused to complainants/farmers for failure of sunflower crop due to defective Kaveri Champ, Research Hybrid Sunflower Seeds.  It is also true that, the Tahasildar, Nargund reported the fact of failure of Sunflower crop of Nargund and surrounding area to OP No.2 and 3 and accordingly OP No.3 issued a letter to Director of Research, UAS, Dharwad for inspection of the affected agricultural irrigated and non-irrigated lands of complainants at Nargund and Konnur Hobli and the Scientists visited the lands of complainants and other affected lands on 07.03.2015 and gave report.  Immediately after the complaint submitted by the complainants and other farmers, OP No.2 to 4 attended the complaint and directed to the Scientists for inspection and there is no deficiency of service on the part of OP No.2 to 4 and the allegations made against them are false and imaginary and therefore, these OPs are not liable to pay compensation to the complainants.  Therefore, prayed for dismissal of the complaint against OP No.2 to 4.

   Written Version of the OP No.5

The OP No.5 contended that, the complaint filed by the complainants is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed.  It is submitted that, the complainants claiming that, they are residents of Nargund village which is false and incorrect and this statement shows non-existence of bonafides on the part of complainants in filing this complaint and as per their own documents, the complainants are from different villages and with a bad intention to show that, the alleged inspection report relatable to each of the complainants, the complainants have falsely alleged that, they are agriculturist and residents of Nargund village.    

   It is true that, OP No.1 is the producer, manufacturer of the seeds and has also marketed the seeds.  The complainants have not produced the seeds bag corresponding to the alleged bills/invoices produced by the complainants.  It is true that, the sunflower seeds are examined, tested and certified by the Government of Karnataka.  These seeds have been utilized by other farmers and received benefits from sowing them and there are no defects in the seeds.  It is submitted that, the complainants have provided total area of irrigated land, non-irrigated land of Nargund Taluk, which is not within the knowledge of OP No.1 and 5, the complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  Out of 5004 hectares of land in Nargund Taluk, the present complaint is pertaining to only 35b acres.  Complainants claim that, they have purchased seeds from OP No.6 which is partly correct and partly incorrect.  Some of them have purchased the seeds from OP No.5 and others have purchased the seeds from other distributors.  It is false to state that, the complainants have sowed the seeds in their lands in the month of November/December-2014 and have put manures, DAP, Urea, Potash and taken keen interest for the growth of crop.  The complainants have failed to provide material particulars regarding sowing of seeds, agricultural care for the growth of sunflower crop.  The complainants are deliberately making vague, incorrect and contradictory stand regarding the method and manner of care taken by them.  The complainants have lodged a complaint before the OP No.4 on 03.03.2015, which is within the knowledge of OP No.6.  This OP has no knowledge about the media and press took the interview of the complainants and that the news item was published in the media and news-paper and these statement given by the complainants are totally irrelevant for adjudication of present complaint.  It is also not within the knowledge of this OP that, OP No.3 issued complaint to Director of Research, University of Agricultural Science, Dharwad for inspection and the Scientist visited the lands of complainants and gave a report.  It is submitted that, the said report only states that, on 07.03.2015, Inspector visited the lands, the same is undated and also not a scientific report.  Only on physical inspection, alleged report has been prepared.  In the said report, there is no discussion and deliberation regarding various other scientific factors/reasons which has to be considered for the purpose of investigation of the quality of seeds.  It is denied that, the report is clear and there is failure of crops due to defective seeds.  It is false to state that, the complainants have taken proper care and made huge investment and suffered loss.  The claim of Rs.16,53,600/- is speculative, fanciful and the complainants wants to enrich at the expenses of OPs.  It is not within the knowledge of this OP that, on 29.04.2015 agricultural farmers including complainants gave complaint to Tahasildar for compensation for failure of crop and the same is put to strict proof and there is no deficiency of service on the part of this OP.  It is further submitted that, the complainants are making request to the OP No.1 to 6 to pay compensation and the request of the complainant has been properly considered and replied by this OP on 16.06.2015 and there is no cause of action for this complaint and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.     

5.       The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and filed 08 documents.  The Authorized Signatory of OP No.5 filed his affidavit evidence and Xerox copies of documents have been produced.

COMPLAINANTS FILED DOCUMENTS AS follows

	Particulars of Documents	Date of Document
C-1 & 2	Cash/Credit Bills
C-3 & 4	Record of Rights	18.10.2016 & 19.10.2016
C-6 to 8	Application by complainant

 

6.     On the basis of above said pleading, oral and documentary evidence, the following points arises for adjudication which are as follows:

1.       Whether the Complainant proves that, the OPs have     committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice?

2.       Whether the Complainants proves that, they are entitled for   the relief?   

3.       What order?

7.       Our Answer to the above points are:-

1.  

                     

2.  

 

3. As per the final order.

REASONS

8.       Point No-1 & 2:- Since both the points are identical and interlinked with each other and hence, we proceed both together.   

9.       The complainants have filed this complaint against the OPs stating that, in Nargund Taluk in 4168 Hectares of irrigated lands and 836 hectares of  non-irrigated lands in total 5004 hectares of land, complainants purchased sunflower seeds of OP No.1 Company through OP No.6 and Raitha Samparka Kendra in total complainants purchased 111 quintal of Kaveri champ sunflower seeds.  As per the terms and conditions of sowing, the complainants have sown the seeds in November-December 2014 and they sprayed the pesticides 3-4 times to get more yield, for the same, they spent Rs.16,000/- per acre including manure and insecticides.

10.     The said crop is four months crop. The complainants observed the tassel, they found that, there are no seeds in the tassel.  The entire sunflower crop failed due to defective seeds.  Complainants approached OP No.4 to inspect the respective lands and urged the compensation of Rs.45,000/- per acre for those caused to the complainants.  The complainants protested for the same before Tahasildar office, Nargund reported the same to OP No.2 and 3.  OP No.3 issued a complaint to the Director of Research, UAS, Dharwad for the inspection of affected irrigated and non-irrigated lands at Nargund and Konnur Hobli.  According to them, they visited the lands on 07.03.2015 and filed a report that, the sunflower crop, flowering was nearly completion in all most all the fields, sterile plants were noticed and observed that, it was beyond the permissible limits of seeds certification standard of hybrid sunflower and they opined that, the sunflower seeds supplied are poor in quality and also observed that, there was no pest and deceased noticed in the sunflowers in the complainants and other farmers lands.  The complainants produced a list of complete table pertaining to the farmers detailed about their lands and the loss occurred by them.

11.     Further complainants submit that, they approached proper channel for the compensation, but the OPs failed to do so. 

12.     On the other hand, OP No.1 and 6 remained absent.  OP NO.2 to 4 filed an objection submitting that, the crop grown by the complainants are denied and further submits that, they are not the necessary party to the proceedings since because the complainants are not the consumers to them.  Further agreed that, the OP No.1 is an authorized company, but the Government of Karnataka had not made any agreement with OP No.1, the OP No.1 approached the Government with all reports and certification of the seeds looking to all those documents, they certified to supply the seeds to the farmers through Raita Samparka Kendra.  OP No.2 to 4 agreed that, the farmers approached to them on 03.03.2015 and these OPs further submitted that, they directed the Research Center, UAS, Dharwad for the inspection and filed the report. 

13.     OP No.5 filed an objection stating that, the allegation made against them is denied that, the seeds supplied by OP No.5 are not defective seeds.   Further submits, that the complaint filed by the complainants don’t have common interest since there is no same cause of action to each of the complainants and the purchase of seeds, month of sowing, quantum or purchase of the seeds are not similar and it is admitted that, the complainants have purchased the seeds on different dates, sowed the seeds on different dates.  Seeds in questions are processed seeds, it need proper storage, the same have to be proved by the each complainant if they took proper care of the seeds before sowing the same.  Each of the complainants is required to be adjudicating separately.  There is no joinder of interest among the complainants. 

14.     This OP denied the report filed by UAS, Dharwad because the said report has been prepared behind the back of this OP.  Further submits that, the UAS is not a competent authority to file a report that too without conducting scientific investigating by complicating authority under law at appropriate time.  It is not possible to give opinion regarding the quality of seeds and hence, report cannot be looked into, since because only on the basis of physical inspection and examining flowering plants, a definite report cannot be given on defectiveness of seeds, defective of seeds and flowering plants are different aspects.     Further submits that, the UAS, Dharwad visited the lands of complainant No.3 and 4 only, they have not visited the other complainants lands. 

15.     The OP No.5 submits that, the purchase of the seeds during the month of October, November and December 2014 but, in the complaint, they have stated that, the seeds are sold in the month of November 2014.  Hence, this statement itself is a contradiction one. Further submits that, the complainant appears to have purchased the seeds in the month of December 2014 and sowed the same in the same month, but as per the alleged inspection report, seeds were required to be sold during October and November. 

16.     Further OP No.5 submits that, the Government of Karnataka satisfied the quality seeds of this OP.  At the time of receiving the seeds from OP No.5, the Government of Karnataka has properly inspected the seeds and made arrangements to sell the seeds to the farmers and rest of the complaint are denied by this OP. 

17.     On scanning on the records on file, it is an undisputed fact the complainants purchased the seeds from OP No.5.  The documents produced the documents pertaining to the purchase of seeds and property particulars, for the same they had produced the receipts and the Pahani belongs to them where they have sowed the seeds of sunflower. 

18.     The main contention taken by the OP No.5 is that, the seeds said to be defective is not the defective seeds because the complainant has not proved that, the seeds are defective.  While we draw an attention to this point, the complainant filed a report of UAS, Dharwad. In this report they specifically said that, the seeds which were sowed by the complainants are defective, since there were no seeds in the tassels.    The OP No.5 objected that, the UAS, Dharwad not issued any notice to the OPs while they visited the fields of the farmers.  As per the records observed by this Commission, it is clear that, the farmers have approached OP No.2 to 4 for their relief.  OP No.2 directed the OP No.3 and 4 to give report.  OP No.3 forwarded the same to UAS, Dharwad for visiting the field on 07.03.2015 as per the Document No.9.  Such being the fact, there is no fault on the part of complainants.  UAS, Dharwad visited approximately 95 Acres of land in different place i.e., Nargund Urban, Dandapur, Kalkeri, Jagpur.  For this also, OP No5 orally objected that, the complainants who had filed a complaint before the Commission, only 2-3 complainants field have visited by UAS, but in remaining field the UAS have not visited and filed the report.  Here it is no need to visit each and every place for the inspection since it is clear that, the spot visited by the UAS is nearby places of the fields of the complainants.  In this report, UAS observed that, the other Hybrid seeds of sunflowers which have been sowed by other farmers are very good in seeds.   So we cannot deny the report of UAS, Dharwad. 

19.     Another objection made by the OP No.5 is that, the Government had permitted them to sell the seeds since it has been examined by the Government and issued the certificate that, the OPs seeds are good quality.  Here commission observed that, while receiving the certificates from the Government, the OP No.5 and 1 produced the good quality of seeds before the Government.  The OP had taken a contention that, the Government had tested the seeds then only permitted OP No.1 and 5 to sold the seeds.  Such being the fact, OP No.5 has to produce the documents pertaining to the seeds in question, the tested report of Government.  Of course, OP produced so many seed testing reports before the Commission received from Seeds Testing Laboratory, Davanagere, but this OP has failed to prove that, the seeds in question are already tested and they are in good quality.  The tested report which has been produced by the OP No.5 that is said to be issued by Seeds Testing laboratory, Davanagere and OP No.5 is now examined the person who had issued the report which will support the case of the OP.     

20.     Moreover, the documents produced by the OP said that, the seeds are in good quality.  In this report, i.e., the Document No.2, the photos, which belongs to the agriculturists and taken a defence that, the yielding is good for the same, but there is no signature on the photos or on the report.  In page No.2, the Agriculturist No.6, Muktumsab M Yaligar filed an affidavit before the Commission stating that, he had not said that, the said Company seeds are in good quality, in anytime or anywhere but, while receiving the seeds the Company representative came and collected some photos from the agriculturists and it had been used for their false report.  The complainant produced the yielding certificate, if they got the good crop they have to receive a so and so quintals of sunflower seeds, but there is no price for the same how much they receive the amount if they got a good yield.  Anyhow, complainant proves that, they have not got the good yield from the seeds which belongs to OP No.1 and 5.  Hence, it is clear that, OPs made unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and therefore, we answer Point No.1 is in Affirmative and Point No.2 in partly Affirmative.

21.     Point No.3:-        For the reasons and discussion made above we proceed to pass the following:-

6698606.  

1.       The complaint filed by the complainants is partly allowed.

2.       OP No.1 and 5 are directed to pay 70% of the claim amount i.e., Rs.2,25,540/- and Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony and harassment to each of the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of complaint till realization. 

3.       Further OP No.1 and 5 are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- to each  complainant towards cost of the proceedings.

4.     OP No.1 and 5 is directed to comply this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, these OPs are liable to pay interest at the rate of 18% p.a from the date of complaint till realization. 

5.       Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.  

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court 22^nd day of October-2020)

 

 

 (Shri B.S.Keri)                                        (Smt.C.H.Samiunnisa Abrar)

       MEMBER                                                      PRESIDENT