BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 317 of 2016
Date of Institution : 21.12.2016
Date of Decision : 10.10.2017.
Vinod Kumar son of Shri Jaimal Chand, resident of Vill. Darbi, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. M/s Zimidara Hybrid Beej Bhandar, Shop No.80, Janta Bhawan, Sirsa through its Prop (Authorized Dealer).
2. Shree Ram Seeds Private Limited (Manufacturing Company and Distributor of the Moong Seeds namely SPSPL-08 through its Managing Director/ Authorized person.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
SMT. RAJNI GOYAT ………………… MEMBER
SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE …… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Vinod Kamboj, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. JBL Garg, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant is an agriculturist and owns and possess about three acres of land in village Darbi, District Sirsa and get cultivated the same under his supervision. That the complainant in the month of May, 2016 i.e. on 12.5.2016 purchased 21 Kg. moong seed quality Moong Panna-SPSP 08 from opposite party no.1 on his assurance about the quality of the seed vide bill No.13901 dated 12.5.2016 for sale consideration of Rs.3900/-. The op no.1 stated that it will be sufficient for three acres of land and also fully assured about the originality of the seeds and that crop will be ready within the period of 60-65 days. It is further averred that thereafter the complainant as per the directions of the ops sowed moong seed in his three acres of land through labour. However, all the dreams of the complainant shattered and complainant suffered a heavy mental shock when he noticed that inspite of lapse of three months, there is no germination of plant over the said moong seeds and also detected that there was no growth in the moong crop. The complainant approached the ops and complained about the non growing of the crop which is only due to lower quality of moong seed supplied by the ops and also convened a panchayat of respectable persons and they also confirmed about the lower quality of seed supplied by ops. However, the ops did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The complainant moved an application before the authorities of Agriculture Department and requested for inspection of his fields and accordingly the officers of the Agriculture Department paid visit in the fields of the complainant and assessed the loss to the extent of 80% of crop. The complainant has suffered financial loss of Rs.2,50,000/- on account of loss of crop besides other expenses. The complainant has been taking rounds to the ops time and again for redressal of his grievance and also got served legal notice upon the ops but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed a joint written statement taking certain preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable in the present form as no defect in the seed is proved in the present complaint. The alleged inspection report prepared by the officials of the Agriculture Department is not in accordance to the letter memo No.52-70/TA (SS) dated PKL the 3.1.2002 issued by the Director of Agriculture, Haryana, Panchkula to all the Deputy Directors of Agriculture in the State of Haryana. Moreover, the complainant has no where mentioned in the complaint the specific killa numbers and square numbers wherein he has allegedly sown the moong seeds purchased by him from op no.1 which is serious defect. The complainant has got no locus standi and cause of action to file the present complaint and that complainant has concealed and suppressed the true and material facts from the Forum and that complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint. The complaint is bad for non compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 13 (1) (C) of the Act as the complainant has not furnished the report of any expert/Lab. test report about the quality of the seeds and that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. On merits, it is submitted that answering op no.1 sold the seeds in sealed and packed packets as received from the distributor. The op no.2 is the distributor of the seeds. The complainant of his own wish demanded for the specific brand of the seeds and the op no.1 sold the seeds as required by the complainant. The op no.1 did not give any alleged assurance to the complainant. It is further submitted that the prescribed season for sowing the moong seed is from 15th February to 15th March and then in July. The op no.1 at the time of selling the moong seed to the complainant had told him that May is not the season for sowing the moong seed but complainant stated that he is an experienced farmer and knows how to sow and get reap the crops. Remaining contents of the complaint have also been denied.
3. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, affidavit of Rajender Kumar co-villager Ex.CW2/A and affidavit of Prem Chand Member Panchayat Ex.CW3/A, photographs Ex.C1 to Ex.C5, bill Ex.C6, forwarding letter dated 1.9.2016 Ex.C7, copy of inspection report Ex.C7/A, postal receipt Ex.C8, legal notice Ex.C9, copy of jamabandi for the year 2012-2013 Ex.C9/A and packet Ex.C10, affidavit of Dev Raj co-villager Ex.CW4/A, and CD Ex.C11. On the other hand, ops produced affidavit Ex.R1, affidavit Ex.R2, copy of letter dated 3.1.2002 Ex.R3, copy of seed test report Ex.R4 and pamphlet Ex.R5.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The perusal of the record reveal that complainant has filed the present complaint with the allegations that he owns and possess three acres of agricultural land in village Darbi in which he has sown crop of moong. He had purchased 21 Kgs. moong seed quality Moong Panna-SPSP08 vide bill No.13901 dated 12.5.2016 for the sale consideration of Rs.3900/- from opposite party no.1. It is also averred that there was no growth in the Moong crop. He made complaint to the Agricultural Department and the officers of the department inspected his field and submitted their report. The seed of the ops was sub standard. Legal notice was served but, however, the ops did not pay any heed to the representation of the complainant. In order to prove his complaint, the complainant has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has reiterated all the contents of his complaint. He has tendered affidavit of Rajender Kumar son of Labh Chand of his village as Ex.CW2/A who has deposed qua the purchase of the moong seed, sown of seed in the field and qua the condition of the crop. He has further furnished affidavit of Prem Chand Member Panchayat as Ex.CW3/A who has also deposed on the line of the deposition of the complainant. The complainant has further tendered photographs Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 depicting the alleged land in which moong seed was sown. Ex.C6 is the bill produced by complainant, Ex.C7 is the forwarding letter of Deputy Agriculture Director, Sirsa, Ex.C7A is copy of inspection report, Ex.C8 is postal receipt, Ex.C9 is legal notice, Ex.C9/A is copy of jamabandi, Ex.C10 is packet cover, Ex.CW4/A is affidavit of Dev Raj who has also deposed on the line of deposition of complainant and Ex.C11 is the CD. On the other hand, opposite parties have taken their specific plea that the complainant has no where mentioned in his complaint specific killa and square numbers of his land wherein he has allegedly sown moong seed purchased from op no.1 and that complaint is bad for non compliance of mandatory provision of Section 13 (1) (c) of the Act as complainant has not furnished test report of any laboratory about the quality of the seed. The relevant period prescribed for sowing moong crop is from 15th February to 15th March and then in July. They have told the complainant that May is not sowing season of moong crop. The complainant did not report any alleged defect in the seeds and that no intimation was ever given to the ops for inspection of the field of the complainant. In order to prove their defence plea, the op no.1 has furnished affidavit of Rishi Bansal Proprietor of op no.1as Ex.R1 who has deposed in terms of plea in the written statement. He has specifically deposed that op no.1 sold seed in sealed packets as were received from distributor. The complainant himself of his own wish demanded for the specific brand of the seed. The complainant has not furnished the square number and killa number, kind of soil, its moisture content etc. The season for sowing moong seed is from 15th February to 15th March and then in July. The seed manufactured by manufacturing company was of high quality and high standard. The op no.1 has furnished affidavit of Ajit Singh their Area Sales Manager as Ex.R2 who has also deposed in support of their defence plea. The ops have also placed on record Ex.C3 copy of letter dated 3.1.2002 and Ex.C4 copy of seed test report.
6. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the complainant has conceded that complainant has not mentioned the killa numbers and square numbers of the agricultural land in which alleged seed was sown by him. The copy of jamabandi reveal that name of the complainant does not find mention therein but however, in complaint he has mentioned in para No.2 that he owns and possess three acres of land without disclosing killa numbers and khasra numbers. It is also admitted fact on record that complainant never made any efforts to get seed tested from any approved laboratory in order to get the expert’s opinion that whether the seed so allegedly purchased by him was in fact of sub standard quality and moreover he has not led any other evidence from which it could be presumed that seed purchased by the complainant was of sub standard quality. Rather, the ops have relied upon the report of Seed Testing Laboratory, Sri Ganganagar as Ex.R4 which proves that the seed of the moong was of approved quality.
7. Though, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for complainant has contended that father of complainant namely Jaimal Chand is the owner of land and he is 80 years old and complainant looks after the land, he sows and harvests crop but however, the record reveal that in his complaint he has not averred even a single word that he is looking after the land of his father and he is sowing and harvesting crops rather he himself claims to be owner in possession of the land in which seed was sown though he is not owner of the land as per the revenue record. Learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon inspection report of the Agricultural Department which is Ex.C7/A. The perusal of this inspection report reveals that even inspecting team has not mentioned the killa numbers and square numbers of the land which was inspected by them nor they have mentioned the name of the owner of the land whose land was inspected by the inspecting team. Moreover, the inspecting team did not serve any notice of their inspection to other party prior to their inspection which is mandatory requirement of law. The report further reveals that it has been specifically mentioned that the sample of the seed was not sent for testing as same was not available.
8. Moreover, we find force from the judgments of the Hon’ble National Commission reported as 2017 (2) CLT 247 titled as Kuber Agro Corporation & others vs. Gurmeet Singh & others and 2016 (4) CLT 507 titled as Prerna Vs. Seed Works India Pvt. Ltd. & anr. and also from judgment of the Hon’ble Haryana State Commission, Panchkula reported as 2007(2) CLT 683 titled as Narender Kumar vs. M/s. Arora Trading company and others relied upon by learned counsel for ops during the course of arguments.
9. In view of the above, it appears from the evidence of complainant that complainant has failed to prove his case and there does not appear to be any deficiency in service on the part of ops. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member Member President,
Dated:10.10.2017. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
