Haryana

Jind

CC/15/120

Rameshwar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S Shiv Beej Bhandar Op 1 Century Seeds Pvt Ltd. Op 2 - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Satish Narwal

30 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND. 
                                           Complaint No. 112 of 2015
   Date of Institution: 31.8.2015
   Date of final order: 23.6.2016

Rameshwar s/o Sh. Singh Ram r/o Narnaund, Tehsil Handi, District Hisar. 
                                                             ….Complainant.
                                       Versus
M/s Shiv Beej Bhandar near old subzi mandi (Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Jind) through its Proprietor Mr. Narender. 
Century Seeds Pvt. Ltd. BA 22-24, phase-II Mangolpuri, Industrial Area, Delhi-110034 through its Managing Director.
                                                         …..Opposite parties.
                          Complaint under section 12 of
              Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before: Sh. Dina Nath Arora, President.
            Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.
            Sh. Mahinder Kumar Khurana, Member.    
    
Present: Sh. S.K. Narwal, Adv. for complainant.
             Sh. A.K. Singla Adv. for opposite parties.
         
ORDER:
            The brief facts in the complaint are that complainant had purchased 16 packet of 500 grams each (8 Kg.) onion seeds marka N-53 Nasik red century bearing lot No.104 for a sum of Rs.5,600/- vide bill No.8019 dated 28.10.2013 from opposite party No.1, which is manufactured by opposite party No.2. The complainant followed all instructions of opposite parties as well as printed  which were 
            Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    …2…
available on packets and sown the said seed in the second week of November, 2013. But despite that it could not grow up as per seeds  as well as according to assurance given  by opposite party No.1 and only about 25% seeds were germinated  due to reason that the seed was not of good quality and the same was defective one. It  also appeared that there are some mix up in seeds and seed is also of inferior quality and sub standard. The complainant contacted the opposite party No.1 regarding inferior quality of onion seed but the opposite party No.1 assured that wait for some time and after some time the expert of opposite parties will inspect his fields. The complainant waited sufficient time but  no any representative or expert visited the fields of complainant. Thereafter, the complainant moved an application to Deputy Commissioner, Hisar on 23.9.2014 and requested to provide compensation from the opposite parties due to supply of inferior quality of seeds. The complaint was forwarded to Deputy Director Agriculture, Hisar for taking necessary action but the said Deputy Director did not initiated any action in this regard and asked the complainant to approach Dr. Hira Lal of Agriculture Department, Narnaund, Tehsil Hansi, Dstrict Hisar. The complainant approached Dr. Hira Lal but he neither inspected his field nor taken  any action after repeated requests. The complainant served a legal notice dated 6.43.2014 through his counsel Sh. Jag Mohan Saini Adv. upon the opposite parties but all in vain. Due to inferior quality of seeds the complainant suffered a huge loss. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is alleged. It is prayed that the complaint be 
            Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    …3…
accepted and opposite parties be directed to  pay a sum of Rs.4,80,000/-  on account of losses due to inferior quality of seeds as well as to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony to the complainant. 
2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties have  put in appearance and filed the  written statement stating in the preliminary objections i.e. the complaint is not maintainable in the present forum and the complainant has got no  locus-standi to file the present complaint.  On merits, it is contended that  the crop of onion like any other crop depends, apart from the seeds quality, upon agro-climatic conditions, type of soil, water and irrigation facilities, supply of nutrients and effective use of fertilizers etc. The documents produced by the complainant does not establish that the seeds purchased by him was actually sown in his field, may be the seed  purchased from some other sources were sown in the fields alleged to have less crop. The present complaint is filed with malafide intention of not to make the payment of due amounts of Rs.4,130/- of opposite party No.1 regarding the purchase of the seed on credit and the same are outstanding against the complainant. Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Sales and Development officer of the company inspected the field of complainant but found no irregularity in germination of the seeds due to quality of seeds. After the approach of complainant Dr. Hira Lal, S.D.O. Agriculture Narnaund, Tehsil Hansi, Distridct Hisar inspected the field of complainant and did not found any complaint in the seed. If there is any complaint regarding quality of poor seed then field of the 
            Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    …4…
complainant-farmer was to be inspected by a committee comprising of two officers of agriculture department and one representative of concerned seed agency and scientists and report be submitted immediately after inspection to the Director of Agriculture Department. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Dismissal of complaint with cost is prayed for.  
3.    In evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. C-1,  cash memo Ex. C-2,  photographs of crop Ex. C-3, letter dated 18.3.2014 Ex. C-4, letter Ex. C-5, postal receipt Ex. C-6, copy of application dated 23.9.2014 Ex. C-7, legal notice dated 6.3.2014 Ex. C-8 and postal receipts Ex. C-9 and Ex. C-10  and closed the evidence. On the other hand opposite parties have produced the affidavit of Sh. Narender Ex. OP-1, affidavit of Sh. Pardeep Kumar Ex. OP-2, pamphlets Ex. OP-3 to Ex. OP-5, authority letter Ex. OP-6, copy of ledger Ex. OP-7, copy of cash memo Ex. OP-8, copy of invoice Ex. OP-9 and copy of circular dated 3.1.2002 Ex. OP-10 and closed the evidence. 
4.    We have heard the arguments of Ld. Counsels of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file. The Ld. counsel of complainant argued that  he had purchased 16 packets of onion seeds from opposite party No.1 and sown the same in 8 acres of land but the said seed was of inferior quality and sub-standard due to that only 25% seeds germinated. The complainant made a complaint with the Agriculture Department, Deputy Commissioner, Hisar but the agriculture department has failed to inspect the field of the 
            Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    …5…
complainant and as such due to low yield, the complainant suffered a huge loss. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel of opposite parties argued that the  onion seed sold to the complainant was of good quality. The complainant has not produced any document/ report whether the complainant had sown the seed which was purchased from opposite party No.1. Apart from this the complainant has not filed any document from which it can be determine that the yield of the onion is less.   
5.    After hearing the Ld. counsel for the parties and going through the record carefully. The grievance of the complainant is that due to inferior quality of seeds, the complainant suffered a loss of Rs.4,80,000/-. In the present case, the complainant has not filed any expert report whether the  onion seed having poor quality. The complainant has failed to comply with the provision of section 13 ( 1) (c ) of Consumer Protection Act as the sample of the seed should have been got tested from some authorized laboratory. Moreover, the complainant has not filed any jamabandi/girdawari report which shows that the complainant has sown the onion seed in 8 acres of land. Apart of this the complainant has not filed any document to prove that  how much onion sold to the commission agent in mandi/market. We are of the view that the crop of onion like any other crop depends, apart from the seed quality, upon agro climate conditions, type of soil, water and irrigation and fertilizers etc. The complainant has also failed to file any evidence whether the complainant has sown the seeds purchased by him was actually sown in his field.  
            Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    …6…
6.    Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the complainant has not been able to prove his case and there is no deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties. So this Forum has no hesitation to dismiss the complaint and hence the complaint is hereby  dismissed. The parties will bear their own litigation expenses.  Copies of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record-room.
Announced on: 23.6.2016
                                 President,
          Member        Member     District Consumer Disputes                                           Redressal Forum, Jind

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                Rameshwar Vs. Shiv Beej Bhandar etc.
                    
                    
Present: Sh. S.K. Narwal, Adv. for complainant.
             Sh. A.K. Singla Adv. for opposite parties.

            Remaining arguments heard. To come up on 23.6.2016 for orders. 
                                President,
        Member       Member                DCDRF, Jind
                                  17.6.2016

Present: Sh. S.K. Narwal, Adv. for complainant.
             Sh. A.K. Singla Adv. for opposite parties.

             Order announced, vide our separate order of even date. The complaint is dismissed. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.  
                                President,
    Member              Member                DCDRF, Jind
                                23.6.2016