Haryana

Karnal

107/2012

Rajinder Kumar S/o Janardhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Garg Fertilizer & Pesticides - Opp.Party(s)

G.S. Chauhan

24 Jun 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.  

                                                               Complaint No.107 of 2012

                                                              Date of instt.21.02.2012

                                                               Date of decision:24.06.2016

 

Rajinder Kumar son of Shri Janardhan, resident of village and post office Pundrak, tehsil and district Karnal.

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                      Versus.

1. M/s Garg Fertilizer & Pesticides, 19, Extension Janta Anaj Mandi, Karnal.

2. Moto Agro Hybrid Seeds Company, village Dharamgarh, Boili, Safidoh, Jind.

 

                                                                   ………… Opposite Parties.

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:      Shri G.S. Chauhan Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri S.K. Mandhan Advocate for opposite party no.1.

                   Shri Rohit Gupta Advocate for opposite party no.2.

 

 

 ORDER:

 

                   This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, on the averments that on 28.10.2011 he purchased two bags of hybrid wheat seed variety HD-2932 from opposite party no.1 at the rate of R.760/- per bag, vide cash memo no. 479, for a total amount of Rs.1520/-. He had sown the said seed in the land measuring 2 acres, but most of the plants destroyed prior to the growth on account of inferior quality of the seed. He approached office of Deputy Director Agriculture, Karnal, who constituted a Technical Committee to inspect his field. Accordingly, the said technical committee inspected his field on 9.12.2011 and observed that there was no yield/ripening in the wheat crop and germination was approximately 30-35% due to poor and inferior quality of the seed. Thereafter, he contacted opposite party no.1 number of times to make good the loss suffered by him to the tune of Rs.50,000/-i.e. Rs.25000/- per acre on account of inferior quality of seed supplied to him, but the opposite party no.1 postponed the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly refused to accede to his genuine request. In this way, there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, which caused him mental pain, agony and harassment apart from financial loss.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties. Opposite party no.1 filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has not approached this forum with clean hands and that the complaint is an abuse of process of law.

                   On merits, the factum of sale of wheat seed by opposite party no.1 to the complainant as alleged in the complaint has been specifically denied. It has been submitted that opposite party no.1 never sold hybrid wheat seed variety HD-2932 to the complainant. Concocted story has been put forward by the complainant to mislead this forum. There was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party no.1. The other allegations made in the complaint have also been denied.

3.                Opposite party no.2 filed separate written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant is estopped by his own acts and conduct from filing the complaint; that this forum has got no jurisdiction to try, entertain and adjudicate the present complaint; that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint; that the complaint is not maintainable in the present forum as there was no privity of contract between the complainant and opposite party no.2; and that complicated questions of law and facts are involved, which cannot be decided by this forum in summary manner.

                   On merits, all allegations made in the complaint have been denied.

4.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.C2, affidavit of Ashok Kumar Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C3 to C5 have been tendered.

5.                On the other hand, no evidence could be led by the opposite parties.

6.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

7.                As per the case of the complainant he had purchased two bags of wheat seed variety HD-2932 at the rate of 760/- per bag from opposite party no.1, vide bill no.479 dated 28.10.2011. The opposite parties have completely denied regarding sale of the seed by opposite party no.1 to the complainant. However, from the copy of the bill Ex.C4 this fact stands established that the complainant had purchased two bags of wheat seed variety HD-2932 from opposite party no.1 for Rs.1520/- on 28.10.2011. The affidavit of the complainant Ex.C2 is also to the same effect. This oral as well as documentary evidence of the complainant has gone completely unrebutted and unchallenged, therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the same. Thus, it stands established that the complainant had purchased two bags of wheat seed variety HD-2932 from opposite party no.1 on 28.10.2011.

8.                It is further case of the complainant that he had sown the said seed in two acres of land, but the germination was not proper. He got his field inspected from the technical team constituted by Deputy Director Agriculture, Karnal, who submitted inspection report Ex.C5. According to the said report, the germination of seed was poor, there was approximately 30-35% germination in all the two acres of wheat field. There is no circumstance to doubt the genuineness of the inspection report prepared by the Technical Experts Committee constituted by Deputy Director Agriculture, Karnal. The complainant in his affidavit Ex.C2 and Ashok Kumar farmer of the Pundrak village vide affidavit Ex.C1 also submitted that the germination of the seed sown by the complainant in his two acres of land was poor. Thus, from the aforesaid evidence of the complainant, it is proved that the germination of the seed purchased by him from opposite party no.1 was poor and it was 30-35% only. In this way, opposite party no.1 supplied defective/poor quality seed manufactured by opposite party no.2, to the complainant and on account of that the complainant must have suffered financial loss apart from mental pain, agony and harassment, therefore, he is entitled to get compensation.

9.                Generally, the average yield of wheat crop remains 18-20 quintals per acre. Therefore, looking into all the facts and circumstances it would be justified to assess loss suffered by the complainant due to poor quality of wheat seed as Rs.35,000/- in two acres of land sown by him with such seed.

10.              As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.35,000/- to the complainant  as compensation due to less yield in his field on account of supply of inferior quality of wheat seed supplied by the opposite parties. We further direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.5500/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 24.06.2016

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member