This C.D coming on before us for final hearing, on 25-09-2007 in the presence of Sri. G. Seetha Rama Sharma, Advocate for Complainant, and Sri. A. Sarath Chander, Advocate for opposite parties 1 & 2; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon considering the arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

ORDER

(Per Sri. P.V Subrahmanyam, President )

1.                 This Complainant is filed under section 12(1) (a) of the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 against two opposite parties with the following averments:-

          The complainant is a resident of Ananthanagar (Konaigudem) village of Nelakondapally Mandal and is a small farmer having taken two acres of agricultural land in Singareddypalem Village, covered by Survey No.365 in his resident mandal. The complainant purchased 15 packets of 10 grams each of hybrid chilly seed of “Tejaswini” variety from opposite party No.2 which was produced by opposite party No.1 for Rs.2,775/- under bill No.21 dated. 14-07-2005. As he lost the original bill, he obtained a Xerox copy of the carbon copy of the bill from opposite party No.2.

Under the guidance of agricultural authorities the complainant sowed chilly seeds in his two acres of land and the crop was grown well, as the complainant took all care and attention. But to the surprise of the complainant the chilly plants did not bear flowers and fruits. The complainant approached the authorities, but in vain. He spent Rs.25,000/- per acre for raising the crop and paid Rs.5,000/- per acre to the owner of the land. Thus the complainant spent an amount of Rs.60,000/-. As the plants did not bear flowers or fruits the complainant sustained heavy loss. The complainant, complained to various authorities at various levels. But no compensation was paid to him. Agricultural officer, after examining the chilly crop, gave a report dated. 22-02-2006 in which it is stated that the loss was 80%. Hence the complaint, to direct the opposite parties Nos. 1 & 2 to pay Rs.60,000/- to the complainant for the loss sustained by him and Rs.2,775/- towards the cost of the chilly seed and Rs.15,000/- towards costs of this complaint.

2.                 The complaint is resisted by opposite parties by filing a counter of opposite party No.1 and memo on behalf of opposite party No.2 that it adopts the said counter. The counter runs to 15 typed pages. The gist of it is:-

That the complaint is filed at belated stage i.e. after 270 days from the date of purchase i.e. 14-07-2005, even though the duration of chilly crop is 180 days. The complainant is not a consumer and the dispute involved is not a consumer dispute within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 because he has no land and the land stated to have been taken by him on lease is for commercial purpose, as such the matter is triable by a civil court. It is denied that the complainant spent Rs.60,000/- for raising the crop as stated by him and that Agricultural Officer gave a report stating that there was loss of 80%.

The seed produced under go several parameter tests in the quality control laboratory, which is recognised, by Ministry of Science and Technology, Central Government of India. The complainant did not take any steps to get sample seed tested by any laboratory to prove that there was defect in the seed. Failure of crop may be for various reasons like poor agricultural practices, negligence towards crop, failure to take proper steps for irrigation, non-use of timely manure, fertilizers, pesticides and insecticides etc,.

The present complaint is wholly misconceived groundless and unsustainable. The allegations of the complainant are totally false unjust imaginary improper illegal and based on surmises and conjectures. The complaint may therefore be dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/-.

3.                 Along with the complaint the complainant has filed 6 documents viz.,

1. Xerox copy of bill
2. Representation of the complainant to Assistant Director of Horticulture, Khammam.
3. Representation to A.E.O., N.K.Pally
4. Representation to J.D.A., Khammam.
5. Petition to Parishkruthi, District Collectorate, Khammam.
6. Attested Copy of report given Agricultural Officer, N.K.P.

4.                 Complainants affidavit in lieu of his examination in chief is also filed in which the above said 6 documents are requested to be marked as Exhibits A1 to A6. Accordingly they are marked. But the said affidavit does not contain attestation of the signature of the deponent.

5.                 Written arguments of complainant filed. No written arguments on behalf of the opposite parties. Oral arguments are not advanced on either side.

6.                 The point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for compensation against the opposite parties as claimed in the complaint?

Point:-

7.                 The case of the complainant is that he purchased Hybrid chilly seed of “Tejaswini” variety from opposite party No.2 which was produced by opposite party No.1 under Exhibit A1. It is his further case that he raised the crop and taken every care and attention, due to which the crop was well grown but the chilly plants did not bear any flowers or fruits therefore he sustained loss.  It is not stated in the complaint or in the affidavit of the complainant filed in lieu of his examination in chief that non-bearing of flowers and fruits by the chilly plants was due to any defect in the seed.  The complainant referred in his affidavit to the report of the Agricultural Officer, which is marked as Exhibit A6. Exhibit A6 is Attested Xerox copy of report of Mandal Agricultural Officer dated. 22-02-2006. It shows that in pursuance of letter dated. 26-01-2006 of District Collector and letter dated. 07-02-2006 of Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, the Mandal Agricultural Officer appears to have inspected the land of the complainant and found very less yield of the mirchi crop of Tejaswini variety and the percentage of loss was 80. It does not show the survey No. of the land which was stated to have been inspected by the Mandal Agricultural Officer, who is the owner of it and who has located the said land etc., particulars. It does not show as to the reason for less yield.

8.                 As already stated above Exhibits A2 to A5 are representations of the complainant. They do not prove any defect in the seed. They simply contain the version of the complainant about the failure of yield in the crop therefore they are not helpful to prove the case of the complainant.

9.                 Even though the complaint and the chief examination affidavit of the complainant do not show that the failure of yield was due to any defect in the seed, the written arguments filed by him show that chilly seed of Tejaswini variety which is being produced by opposite party No.1 was recently banned in Khammam District by the Government of Andhra Pradesh due to number of complaints against the product and the chilly seed purchased by the complainant is of substandard variety. For the first time defect in the seed is contended by the complainant in the written arguments.  There is no proof of banning the chilly seed produced by opposite party No.1 on complaint.  Even presuming for a moment that the intention of the complainant in filing the complaint is to make this Forum understand that the seed was defective, he should have taken steps to send sample seed or at least the grown up plants together with the attached seed with which they were germinated to any laboratory for analysis and report. Had the complaint taken such steps such report would have been taken into consideration for disposing of this matter. In the absence of any such expert opinion, simply basing upon the contention of the complainant, it cannot be said that his allegation that the seed produced by opposite party No.1 was defective. Giving of such opinion in this case would be without even prima-facie material. Therefore without touching other aspects, which were dealt by the opposite parties in their counter, it is held that the complainant is not entitled for any compensation against the opposite parties. The point is answered against the complainant.

10.               In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in this Open Forum on Friday, the 28^th day of September, 2007.

President            Member          Member

 District Consumers Forum, Khammam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED FOR

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR

President             Member          Member

  District Consumers Forum, Khammam.