BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM (UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986), MEDAK AT SANGAREDDY.
Present: Sri Mekala Narsimha Reddy, M.A.,LL.B.,
P.G.D.C.P.L. PRESIDENT (FAC)
Smt: Meena Ramanatham, B.Com., Lady Member
Thursday, the 26th day of August 2010
CC. No. 21 of 2010
Between:
1. P. Kotaiah S/o Sangaiah and Pentamma,
Aged: 34 years, Occ: Agriculture.
2. P. Pentamma W/o Sangaiah,
Aged: 55 years, Occ: Agriculture.
3. P. Sangaiah S/o Ramaiah,
Aged: 65 years, Occ: Nil,
All are residing at H.No. 2-24, Turkala Mamdapur(V),
Chinna Shankarampet (M), Post: S.Kondapur,
Via: Rajapally, District: Medak – 502 117. .... Complainants
And
M/s. UK Agri Seeds (India) Pvt. Ltd,
H.No. 3-7-56/6, Sai Saopthagiri Colony,
Mansoorabad, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 068.
Represented through its person-in-charge/Proprietor/Manager. ... Opposite party
This case came up for final hearing before us on 13.08.2010 in the presence of complainant in person and Sri. N. Veeranna Patil, Advocate for opposite party, upon hearing the arguments, on perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this forum delivered the following
O R D E R
(Per Sri. Mekala Narsimha Reddy, President (FAC))
This complaint is filed Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for praying the Hon’ble Forum to directing the opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- towards loss of water melon crop over an extent of Ac. 1-00 guntas with 24% p.a. and also pay Rs.20,000/- for compensation and also pay the costs of litigation.
The averments in the complaint in brief are as follows:
The complainants are natives and residents of Turkala Mamdapur Village and are Agriculturists by profession. The complainant No. 1 is having vast experience in raising and growing all varieties of crops including the cash and commercial crops. The opposite party herein it the producer and marketer of F1-Sweety water melon seed and it the practice of the opposite party to sell its products by coming to the doorsteps of the needy farmers like the complainant. That in addition to selling of watermelon seed, the opposite party also sells various varieties of different seeds and it is doing this business since last eight years. The complainant No. 1 and the opposite party emissary are acquainted in that manner. With that acquaintance, the emissary of the opposite party when he had been to the village of complainants, lured the first complainant to purchase the above F1-Seety variety of water melon seed stating that it will give good yield around 30 to 40 quintals and stated that the complainants would get benefit. The agriculture is the only means of livelihood for complainants to eke out their livelihood. With the assurance given by the emissary of opposite party, the complainant No. 1 purchased the above variety of seed numbering 12 packets of 50 grams each under lot No. 09-DGP-00190 @ Rs. 5,000/- per kg, paying Rs.10,000/- towards 2 kgs of seed under delivery challan No. 177 on 08.12.2009.
The complainant stating that within three days of purchase, the complainant No. 1 sowed the above seed in his agricultural fields bearing lands in Sy. No. 183/E measuring Ac. 0-04 guntas; Sy. No. 184/A measuring Ac. 0-003 guntas; Sy.No. 185/A measuring Ac. 0-003/4 guntas; Sy. No. 186/A measuring Ac.0-18 guntas and Sy. No. 176/A measuring Ac.0-17 guntas, total admeasuring Ac.1-00½ guntas, situated at Turkala Mamdapur village of Shankarampet ® Mandal, Medak district. The above lands st6and on the name of the second complainant. Both the first and third complainants used to look-after the above fields and monitor them from time to time. The complainant applied the water in required quantity through bore-well. The complainants also applied the pesticides and fertilizers in required quantity and also observed the distance between plant to plant and row to row. The complainant No. 1 followed due procedure as informed by the opposite party in growing the above variety of crop. The duration of the crop was 120 days. To the utter shock and surprise of complainants, after 120 days of duration, the complainant No. 1 noticed the water melons weighing not more than 1 kg each. The entire crop was in the same manner. Taken a back with surprise, the complainant No. 1 informed the same to opposite party and requested to inspect the field and compensate him. But the opposite party failed to respond. Complainant also lodged a complaint with the local agriculture officer with a request to cause inspection and given his report. The agriculture officer visited the fields of the complainant and inspected the crop and assessed the loss but did not furnish any report stating that he would furnish his report to the Hon’ble forum.
As a matter of fact, the weight of each water melon would weight around 2 kgs but the weight of water melons raised by the complainants of the seed supplied and sold by opposite party did not weight even one kilogram each. Thereby the complainant sustained huge loss having purchased the seed incurring Rs.10,000/-. Had the complainants received the yield as assured by opposite party, the complainants could have received Rs.50,000/- per acre and thereby the complainant sustained this loss. This all had occasioned due to the spurious and sub-standard quality of seed supplied and sold by the opposite party, hence the opposite party is liable and responsible to make good the loss sustained by complainants. The wholesale rate of water melon per kg was Rs.3-50 while the retails price of the same is around Rs.7/- to Rs.8/-. That these are the facts which constitute cause of action for filing the complaint, which aerostat Turkala Mamdapur village, hence within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Forum. The acts of the opposite party in assuring that the seed will give good yield and thereby supplying spurious and sub-standard quality of seed amounts to deficiency of service and unfair practice of trade. Hence the complaint.
After registering the case notices were sent to the opposite party. The opposite party received the notice but failed to file counter, the service held sufficient and the opposite party called absent and set exparty. Heard arguments.
The complainant has filed the chief affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A5; Memo filed by the complainant to treat written arguments.
The point for consideration whether the complainant is entitles for the loss of crop against the opposite party?
The complainant is alleging having vast experience in raising and growing all varieties of crops including the cash and commercial crops. The opposite party to sell its products by coming to the doorsteps for needy farmers. This business doing cast last eight years. The opposite party lured the compalinant it will give good yield around 30 to 40 quintuls. Same was purchased by paying Rs.10,000/- under delivery challan on 08.12.2009, within 3 days sowed the above seeds in his agricultural land the complainant has taken all precautions regarding the growth of plants.
Further alleged that after 120 days of duration the water melons weighing not more than 1 kg each. Same was informed to the opposite party to inspect the field and compensate him. But the opposite party failed to respond. The complainant also lodged a complaint before agriculture office with a request to inspection and give his report. Agriculture officer observed the loss but did not furnish any report. Stating that he would furnish news paper to the forum. As a matter of facts the weight of each water melon would weight around 2 kg to 15 kgs rate of water melon per kg Rs.3-00 paise it means which is Rs.7/- to Rs.10/- the act of opposite party done grass negligence upon the sold spurious seeds and caused loss and damage.
An opportunity was given to the opposite party to explain or to state about his case but they have neither appeared before the Forum nor filed any counter on their behalf and remained exparty.
In such circumstances whatever stated by the complainant is proved by filing sufficient document. Which are marked as Ex.A1 to A5. The complainant in his complaint also prayed this forum to direct the opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- crop loss due to the spurious seeds and pay Rs.20,000/- for compensation. As the complainant has not established the said fact by filing relevant evidence. He is not entitled for the full amount. Where upon a newspaper statement was issued on agriculture officer on 01.03.2010 stating therein that germinality of seeds was found to be poor and the seeds were of sub-standard quality. According to the complainant he suffered a loss of price of seeds labour charges for preparation of land of sowing seeds, irrigation costs loss of crop and also mental torture. Hence certainly it caused loss to the complainant and the same is to be compensated by way of granting compensation. The complainant taken the all the measuring in producing of water melon. The point is answered infavour of the complainant.
In the result the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- cost of seeds. It is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards cost and compensation. This order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum this 26th day of August, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT (FAC) LADY MEMBER
Copy to
1) The complainant
2) The Opposite parties
3) Spare copy copy delivered to the Complainant/
Opposite Parties On_________
Dis.No. /2010, dt.
