DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR
Complaint No. 365
Instituted on: 05.09.2018
Decided on: 05.04.2021
Daljit Singh son of Pritpal Singh, resident of Village Kakra, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, Distt. Sangrur 148026.
…Complainant
Versus
1. Mohindra Seed House, Old Sabji Mandi, Cheeka, Distt. Kaithal (Haryana) through its Prop/Owner.
2. Shipra Seeds, Madlauda, Distt. Panipat 13213 (Haryana) through its Prop/MD.
..Opposite parties
For the complainant : Shri S.S. Ratol, Adv.
For Ops : Shri Satpal Sharma, Adv.
Quorum: Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President
Shri V.K.Gulati, Member
Order by : Shri Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President.
FACTS
1. Complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties on the ground that the complainant is an agriculturist and doing the work of agriculture since 30 years with the help of his family members in the land of about 70 acres. Complainant used to take three crops in a year instead of two crops being the progressive farmer.
2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased the seeds of PUSA-1509 basmati variety of rice weighing 400 Kgs. @ Rs.70/- per KG i.e. 40 packets in the packing of 10 Kg. each for Rs.28,000/- vide bill number 413 dated 27.4.2018. Further case of the complainant is that the OP assured that the seed has been prepared and manufactured by OP number 2. It was further assured that this variety of seed takes less time to ripe as compared to others. Further case of the complainant is that he treated the seeds as per the recommendation of the Ops. After the proper treatment, the paniree was sown in the well prepared field. Thereafter the treatment of the plants was done with the help of fungiside namely bavistin and thereafter a spray was also done on the same fungiside. The complainant took all precautions, but the grievance of the complainant is that the seeds supplied by the OP were of defective quality and were suffering/carrying from some virus, despite all the treatment and spray of pesticides and due to the defective seeds, some plants got destroyed and almost 15% of the plants got destroyed due to defective seeds, as such the complainant suffered the loss of 2.1/2 quintals per acre of the yield. The complainant also moved an application to Tehsildar, Bhawanigarh and Chief Agriculture Officer, Sangrur. General price of the variety of Paddy PUSA 1509 Basmati is minimum Rs.2500/- per quintal and as such the complainant suffered loss of Rs.6750/- per acre and the complainant suffered total loss of Rs.4,75,000/-. Though the complainant requested the Ops to pay the amount of Rs.4,75,000/- to the complainant but all in vain. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.4,75,000/- along on account of crop damage, Rs.28000/- as cost of seeds, Rs.2 Lakh on account of use of pesticides, Rs.2.25 Lakh on account of mental tension and further to pay Rs.55000/- on account of litigation expenses.
WRITTEN VERSION
3. In reply filed by the OPs, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the present complaint is not maintainable, that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint, that the complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands and that this Commission has got no territorial jurisdiction to hear and decide the present complaint. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant had purchased the seeds of PUSA-1509 from OP number 1 vide bill dated 27.4.2018. It is further averred that the OPs rendered no advice and exercised no control, supervision or monitoring with regard to the crop production practices adopted by the complainant. The said responsibility lies exclusively with the complainant. It has been denied that the complainant ever approached the OP. It is further averred that the complainant did not mention the date of sowing in his complaint and it is highly probable that the crop in question was sown early date in utter breach of notification of Punjab Govt. issued on April 20, 2018 not to sow the seeds of paddy prior to 20.5.2018. Moreover, the Ops have never been informed to association with inspection team and inspection was conducted at the back of the Ops despite of this the said report of inspection was never served to the Ops. As such, any liability or deficiency in service on the part of the Ops has been denied.
EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS
4. The learned counsel for the parties produced their respective evidence.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant is an agriculturist and doing the work of agriculture since 30 years and is an expert in the field of agriculture and he had purchased the seeds of PUSA-1509 basmati variety of rice weighing 400 Kgs. @ Rs.70/- per KG i.e. 40 packets in the packing of 10 Kg. each for Rs.28,000/- vide bill number 413 dated 27.4.2018. The learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that the OPs assured that the seed has been prepared and manufactured by OP number 2. It was further assured that this variety of seed takes less time to ripe as compared to others. The learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that despite assurance of the Ops, the grievance of the complainant is that the complainant suffered total loss of Rs.4,75,000/- on account of less yield.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Ops has argued that the jurisdiction lies at Kaithal as the seeds were purchased from Cheeka Mandi, District Kaithal. There is nothing on the file that the seeds were defective as such the Ops have prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
7. To prove this case, the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit and has deposed as per the complaint, Ex.C-2 is the receipt of seeds purchased from the OP dated 27.4.2018 for Rs.28700/-, Ex.C-3 is letter written to Halqa patwari and the report of Halqa Patwari is Ex.C-4, Ex.C-5 is report, Ex.C-6 is the letter written to Chief Agriculture Officer, Sangrur stating that some of the plants were on more height and dry. Ex.C-9 to Ex.C-17 are the photographs.
8. On behalf of the Ops, the rules of Government of India is Ex.OP-1. It is notification of Government of India wherein it is mentioned that :-
“23-A: Action to be taken by the Seed Inspector if a complaint is lodged with him:-
(1) If farmer has lodged a complaint in writing that the failure of the crop is due to the defective quality of seeds of any notified kind or variety supplied to him, the Seed Inspector shall take in his possession the marks of labels, the seed containers and a sample of unused seeds to the extent possible from the complaint for establishing the source of supply of seeds and shall investigate the causes of the failure of his crop by sending samples of the lot to the Seed Analyst for detailed analysis at the State Seed Testing Laboratory. He shall thereupon submit the report of his findings as soon as possible to the competent authority.
(2) In case, the Seed Inspector comes to the conclusion that the failure of the crop is due to the quality of seeds supplied to the farmer being less than the minimum standards notified by the Central Government, he shall launch proceedings against the supplier for contravention of the provisions of the Act or these Rules.”
9. So, as per this notification when a farmer lodges a complaint in writing that the failure of the crop is due to the defective quality of seeds of any notified kind or variety supplied to him, the Seed Inspector shall take in his possession the marks of labels, the seed containers and a sample of unused seeds to the extent possible from the complaint for establishing the source of supply of seeds and shall investigate the causes of the failure of his crop by sending samples of the lot to the Seed Analyst for detailed analysis at the State Seed Testing Laboratory. But this report is missing, so it is clear that the Inspector has not submitted any report as per the rules. Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-8 are the certificates issued by Haryana State Seed Certification Agency, Ex.OP-9 is notification, Ex.OP-11 is the affidavit of Kulbhushan son of Shri Om Parkash and Ex.OP-12 is the copy of instructions.
10. Admittedly, the seeds were purchased vide receipt Ex.C-2 from the OP District Kaithal Haryana and as per the old Act the jurisdiction lies at Kaithal and not at Sangrur.
11. Now coming to the facts of the case, the complainant has suffered loss of Rs.4.75 Lac on account of less yield and Rs.2,00,000/- on account of pesticides, fertilizers, insecticides and Rs.2,25000/- on account of mental tension and agony. The onus was on the complainant to prove that how he has suffered loss of Rs.4,75,000/-. There is no evidence on the file that how much yield per acre was obtained from the seeds and how much less yield was obtained from the land in which these seeds were sown and how much was the difference between the yield obtained in which the seeds were sown. So this evidence is missing in this case. Further there is no evidence on the file that the complainant suffered loss of Rs.4,75,000/-.
12. The complainant has also stated that he had suffered loss of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of pesticides and fertilizers etc, but this evidence is also missing that how he had spent Rs.2,00,000/- on pesticides and fertilizers etc., as such, it is cleat that the complainant has failed to establish his case on record.
13. In view of our above discussion, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.
Pronounced.
April 5, 2021.
(Vinod Kumar Gulati) (Jasjit Singh Bhinder)
Member President
