Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/75

Jasdev Pal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Dashmesh Kheti Sewa Kender - Opp.Party(s)

Charanjit Sidana

06 Mar 2019

ORDER

        DISTRICT  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  FORUM,  FARIDKOT

 

        C. C. No.          75 of 2018

  Date of Institution :          03.05.2018

  Date of Decision :            06.03.2019

 

Jasdev Pal Singh son of Baldev Singh resident of Village Chakk Sahu, District Faridkot.

   .....Complainant

Versus

M/S Dashmesh Kheti Sewa Kender through its Proprietor Malwinderpal Singh, Shop No.52, New Grain Market, Faridkot.

                                    ....Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:     Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President.

Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

Present:       Sh Charanjit Sidana, Ld Counsel for complainant,

 Sh Jatinder Bansal, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal , President)

                                             Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops for selling substandard rice seeds and for seeking directions to Ops to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for causing loss in crop production and for causing mental agony and harassment.

2                                          Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that on assurance of OP that seeds are of good  quality and would give better yield,

cc no.-75 of 2018

complainant purchased rice seeds of brand P R 111F from OP vide bill no.353 dated 3.05.2017 for Rs.7,000/- and sowed the same in his fields. After some days, when seeds grew into plants, complainant noticed that sold seeds were duplicate and false in nature and were mixed with rice seeds and these were of some other kind. Complainant immediately complained about this to OP but he paid no attention towards his complaint and told that sample of seeds has been sent to Company for rechecking and only Company can solve this problem. It is the fault of Company and he cannot do anything in this matter. Thereafter, complainant complained about this to Agriculture Department and their officers visited the fields of complainant and after investigation, they made report regarding loss to complainant and clearly wrote that seeds were old, false and mixed with seeds of other plants. Thus, due to supply of duplicate seeds by OP, complainant has suffered huge loss in crop production and suffered great harassment and mental agony. He has prayed for directing OP to pay Rs.2 lacs to complainant on account of loss suffered by him. Hence, the present complaint.

3                                                 The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 8.05.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                                On receipt of the notice, OP filed reply taking preliminary objections that present complaint does not disclose any consumer dispute and there is no finding regarding quality of seeds and alleged mixing of seeds is not proved. Seeds purchased from answering OP were never sent to any laboratory for scientific analysis and there is no lawful expert report regarding any defect in seeds sold by him.  Complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has concealed the material facts from this Forum and it is filed with

cc no.-75 of 2018

malafide intention to harass the OP. Moreover, complaint is bad for misjoinder of necessary parties and even it involves complicated questions of law and facts that cannot be decided in summary proceedings. It is averred that this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the present matter. However, on merits, OP have denied all the allegations of complainant being incorrect and false and asserted that they never sold seeds to complainant in loose form, rather sold the same in sealed bags in same conditions as were purchased by answering OP from producer of seeds. Seeds sold by OP were duly packed and its labelling contained  correct particulars of seeds. It is further averred that complainant purchased 7 sealed bags of 30 KG each and were foundation seeds and all were of superior quality and certified by  the concerned seed certification agency. Answering OP is duly licensed to carry the business of dealer in seeds and OP purchased the said seeds from Matta Seed Farm, Kotkapura vide bill no.21 dated 20.04.2017 and said Matta Seed Farm is approved producer of certified seeds and moreover, OP did not sell the seeds to complainant in loose form. Seeds sold to complainant were duly packed in sealed bags. OP sold the entire stock of PR 111F variety of seeds purchased from Matta Seed Farm to consumers and nobody has ever made complaint regarding its quality to OP. It is totally denied that seeds were duplicate and were mixed with variety of rice seeds and complaint made by him is false, frivolous and concocted and is made only to cause harassment to answering OP. It is further averred that 8 KG of heavy seeds are required for transplanting an acre and complainant sowed the seeds purchased from them in his 30 acres of land and thus, seeds purchased by him were insufficient for cultivation. Moreover, yield of crop depends on several factors such as seed treatment before sowing, method of sowing, weed control, irrigation methods, fertilizers application, land preparation and previous crop

 

cc no.-75 of 2018

residue and even application of seeds in proper way. Improper application of farming practices also affect the yield and in present case, complainant is negligent and careless in carrying out farming practices as he might not have applied proper farming practices as per recommendations of Punjab Agriculture University. It is further averred that there is no deficiency in service on their part. All the other allegations and allegation with regard to relief sought too have been denied being wrong and incorrect and prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

5                                                Parties were given proper opportunities to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings. Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 7 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                           The ld Counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Malwinder Singh Ex.OP-1, and documents Ex OP-2 to Ex OP-6 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

7                                We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as parties and have carefully gone through the evidence and documents produced by parties.

8                                         Ld Counsel for complainant argued that on assurance of OP for better quality, complainant purchased rice seeds of brand P R 111F from OP against proper bill for Rs.7,000/- and sowed the same in his fields, but when seeds grew into plants, complainant noticed that sold seeds were duplicate and false in nature and were mixed with rice seeds and these were of some other kind. Complainant  reported the matter to OP but he paid no attention towards his complaint saying sample of seeds has been sent to Company for rechecking and

cc no.-75 of 2018

only Company can solve this problem. It is the fault of Company and he cannot do anything in this matter. Complainant also made complaint to Agriculture Department and their officers after investigation, made report regarding loss to complainant and clearly wrote that seeds were old, false and mixed with seeds of other plants. Due to supply of duplicate seeds by OP, complainant has suffered huge loss in crop production and has also suffered great harassment and mental agony, which amounts to deficiency in service. Prayer for accepting the present complaint is made. He has stressed on documents Ex C-1 to 7.

9                               To controvert the allegations levelled by complainant, ld counsel for OPs averred that present complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious and complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands. No cause of action arises against them and it is devoid of any merits. Though it is admitted that complainant purchased said seeds from OP. It is argued that complaint is bad for misjoinder of necessary parties. It is further argued that they never sold seeds to complainant in loose form, rather sold the same in sealed bags in same conditions as were purchased by them from producer of seeds and were duly packed and  even its labelling contained correct particulars of seeds. Complainant purchased 7 sealed bags of 30 KG each and all were foundation seeds and were of superior quality and certified by the concerned seed certification agency. It is argued that OP is duly licensed to carry the business of dealer in seeds and OP purchased the said seeds from Matta Seed Farm, Kotkapura vide bill no.21 dated 20.04.2017 and said Matta Seed Farm is approved producer of certified seeds and moreover, OP did not sell the seeds to complainant in loose form. They sold entire stock of these seeds and nobody has ever made complaint regarding its quality to OP. It is wrong that seeds were duplicate and were mixed with variety of rice seeds. It is further averred that

cc no.-75 of 2018

8 KG of heavy seeds are required for transplanting an acre and complainant sowed said seeds in his 30 acres of land which were insufficient for cultivation. Yield of crop depends on several factors such as seed treatment before sowing, method of sowing, weed control, irrigation methods, fertilizers application, land preparation and previous crop residue and even application of seeds in proper way. Improper application of farming practices also affect the yield and in present case, complainant is negligent and careless in carrying out his farming practices as he might not have applied proper farming practices as per recommendations of Punjab Agriculture University. There is no deficiency in service on their part and all the other allegations are denied being wrong and incorrect. Prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

10                                          We have anxiously considered the rival contentions in the light of evidence on record. The case of the complainant is that he purchased paddy seeds from OP and as per allegations of complainant seeds sold by OP were duplicate and were of some other kind, due to which complainant could not get desired yield and suffered loss in crop production. He has prayed for compensation on account of loss in yield suffered by him. In reply, OP have denied all the allegations being wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is no expert evidence brought forward on record by complainant to prove his allegations regarding duplication of seeds. Ld counsel for OP brought our attention towards the document Ex Op-5 which is copy of Certificate of Test/Analysis by Seed Analyst wherein it is clearly mentioned that seeds purchased by complainant were of good quality. OP also produced on record copy of bill dated 20.04.2017 which clearly proves their pleading that they purchased seeds in question from Matta Seed Farm which is approved dealer in seeds. Ex OP-3 is copy of license produced by OP on

cc no.-75 of 2018

record to show that they have been duly licensed by Licensing Authority cum Chief Agriculture Officer, Faridkot to deal in seeds. Ex OP-4 is folio of register maintained by OP and it clearly reveals the fact that sale made to complainant, has been duly recorded in the register of OP and it also bears the stamp affixed by Opposite party. There is no adulteration or substandard quality of seeds sold by OP to complainant. OP have also placed on record copy of instructions issued by Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana wherein recommendations for proper farming practices are given. Ex OP-7 is the letter written by OP to Chief Agriculture Officer, Faridkot  wherein OP has cleared the point that seed samples taken by officials of Agriculture Department at block level, were got checked in Laboratory at Gurudaspur, where all seeds were found to be pure and of good quality. Moreover, the OPs have taken specific objection that they have sold seeds to complainant in sealed package as it was received by them from its manufacturer Matta Seed Farms. They have not sold seeds to complainant in loose form, rather sold the seeds in sealed packing. This fact is also not denied by the complainant that he purchased the seeds in question from OP in sealed packing. Even as per their own pleading, when complainant made complaint to OP, it told complainant that OP will send the complaint of complainant to manufacturer for further action and if there is any fault in the seeds, then only manufacturer is liable and not the OP. The complainant has not impleaded Matta Seed Farm, who is manufacturer of the seeds as necessary party in the present complaint. If there is any fault in the seeds, then only manufacturer is liable for the same. OP who is only a retailer, is not liable for the quality of product. Only manufacturer is liable for the fault in the product, who gave assurance regarding its quality and good yield. In the present case,  complainant has not made manufacturer as party and thus, no  relief can be granted against a person who is not a party to the complaint. OP have produced

cc no.-75 of 2018

sufficient and cogent evidence to prove their case and authenticity of these documents is beyond any doubt. On the contrary complainant has nothing to say in this.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP.

11                               From the above discussion and keeping in view the documents and evidence placed on record by respective parties, this Forum is of considered opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP. Therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merits. However, in peculiar circumstances of the case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum:

Dated: 6.03.2019

 

(Parampal Kaur)                 (Ajit Aggarwal)

 Member                              President