M/s. Banadeshwara Agro Agencies V/S Shivarudappa S/o Gundappa - Consumer Court Case

Karnataka

Raichur

CC/08/39

Shivarudappa S/o Gundappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Banadeshwara Agro Agencies - Opp.Party(s)

T.Saganna Gouda

27 Jan 2009

ORDER

DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,DC Office Compound, Sath Kacheri
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/39

Shivarudappa S/o Gundappa						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
M/s. Banadeshwara Agro Agencies Mr. G.Nagesh Sameer P. Mulay Managing Director Mr. Ravi Kumar C						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

JUDGEMENT By Sri. N.H. Savalagi, President. This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act by the complainant Shivarudrappa against the four Respondents for deficiency of service. The brief facts of the complaint are as under: The complainant is the owner & possessor of agricultural land bearing Sy.No. 362 measuring 12 acres 31 guntas situated at Bagalawad village, Tq. Manvi, District Raichur. On 13-10-07 he purchased three packets of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Seeds (Jawar seeds) for Rabbi season each containing 3 Kgs from Respondent No-1 produced & manufactured by Respondent No-2 to 4 vide Bill No. 375. He sown the seeds and planted in his entire land in the month of October-2007. After following all precautionary measures for growing the said seeds and by applying requisite fertilizers and pesticides. He had invested huge amount for preparation of soil, removal of weeds etc., as per instructions given on the packet of the seeds. At the time of semi maturity stage of the said Jawar crop he noticed that there was no proper setting of seeds. However he hoped that the crop would set the seeds with the passage of time but the crops failed because of non-setting of seeds. Similar was the fate of other farmers who had grown the brand of Jawar seeds in their lands. He could not harvest the crop due to complete failure. The other farmers who had used Jawar Seeds of other company have got good yield like 35 quintal per acre and sold the Jawar at the market price of Rs. 1700 1800 per quintal and got hand some profit. But this complainant and other farmers who had used the seeds of the Respondent Company viz., Brand of Ajeet 333 have lost the crop and incurred huge loss. The failure of the Jawar crop of the said brand of seeds supplied by the Respondents was published in eminent news paper like Kannada Prabha. During the stage of setting of seeds of Jawar crop after opening husk, the complainant & other farmers brought to the notice of Respondents to visit their field in question to make spot inspection but they did not turn up. Further during the first week of January 2008 the complainant and other farmers requested the Inspector of seeds Agricultural Department Manvi and Raichur in the matter but not yielded any result. So they requested the Director of Agricultural Science, Gulbarga for needful action even there was no response. As such the complainant and other farmers sent a requisition to the University of Agricultural Science, and Assistant Director of Research, Raichur visited the field of the complainant and other farmers and gave report to the complainant and also forwarded the other report to Joint Director of Agricultural Sciences Raichur. The Respondents have made wide publicity about the quality of their Hybrid Seeds and made the farmers like the complainant to believe that their Jawar seeds would give yield about 34 to 38 quintal per acre. But in-fact the brand of seeds were defective and entire crop failed. The complainant has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and he had expected good yield and income. Due to failure of crops for the defective seeds, he sustained loss of more than 80,000/-. This act of Respondents in supplying defective seeds amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. Hence for all these reasons the complainant has sought for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- including cost. 2. In-pursuance of service of notice Respondent No-1 appeared through Sri. Mallangouda Advocate and Respondent No- 2 to 4 appeared through Sri. T.M. Swamy Advocate and have filed separate written version. The Respondent No-1 in his written version has contended that the entire reading of complaint does not disclose any cause of action and deficiency of service on the part of this Respondent No-1. This Respondent is only a dealer of seeds produced by Respondent No- 2 to 4, as such there is no deficiency of service on the part of this Respondent. The allegations that the complainant is the owner & possessor of agriculture land bearing Sy.No. 362 measuring 12 acres 31 guntas situated at Bagalawad village Tq. Manvi, are not within the knowledge of this Respondent. The allegation in Para-2 of the complaint with regard to purchase of seeds by the complainant from this Respondent No-1 is not disputed. But it is specifically denied that the seeds purchased are for Rabbi season. As a matter of fact, the complainant has voluntarily purchased the seeds for Khariff season. The complainant at no point of time has approached this Respondent with regard to his grievance as contended in Para-3 to 11 of his complaint. The complainant has un-necessarily involved this Respondent No-1 without any cause of action and deficiency in service. Hence for all these reasons he has sought for dismissal of the complaint against him with exemplary cost. 3. Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version have stated that the averments at Para- 2 of the complaint to the extent that the complainant has purchased the products Hybrid Ajeet Seeds 333 of these Respondents from Respondent No-1 is true. The averments made in Para- 3 & 4 of the complaint are not within the knowledge of these Respondents hence denied. The averments in Para- 5 & 6 of the complaint are imaginary and speculative and not based on cogent evidence hence denied. It is denied that these Respondents have not cared for the requests of the complainant regarding complaints made by him. The concerned Agriculture Authority visited the lands and submitted report before Joint Director of Agricultural Science Raichur, wherein it is not alleged that the failure of crop was due to alleged defective seeds supplied by these Respondents only, but it was due to other factors as stated therein. It is specifically denied that these Respondents assured about the yield per acre. The averments regarding loss of income per acre as stated in Para-11 of his complaint are imaginary and speculative and not based on cogent evidence. The Respondents have not adopted any unfair trade practice and are not deficiency in service to the complainant. It is submitted that neither Respondent N-1 nor Respondent No-2 to 4 advised the complainant and sold the alleged seeds for sowing during Rabi season and was not advised by any Respondents for such sowing. The package of pocket speaks about the characteristics, quantity of seeds to be applied and the period of sowing and about safeguard against the diseases, pests and insects. When such precautions taken by the Respondents it is denied that there was any lapse, negligence unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the Respondents. The complainant and other farmers who have sown the seeds of variety have completely over looked the advise and literature submitted along with the seeds. The complainant and other farmers who had purchased the seeds of the variety might have sown them in paddy fields which are irrigated. The other farmers including the complainant with an intention to reap second crop might have sown them after the paddy crops. Being the paddy fields, already with more moisture retained in the lands have suffered cold stress during flowering stage. It is further submitted that the hybrid Jawar Ajeet 333 seeds is breed and recommended only for Khariff cultivation and not for Rabi. The said recommendation is displayed on each sealed package itself. However because of the good grain quality of these Respondents Company the farmers in the past have grown this hybrid variety in Rabi season and got good yield under normal season. Apart from that in the Athnur village Tq. Manvi few farmers who have grown same variety of Jawar Seeds which was in right time have got good yield, therefore the allegations made against the products of these Respondents are without any cogent evidence. The initial high temperature at planting stage followed by low temperature during subsequent month coupled with increasing soil moisture stress affects the growth of bio-mass of the plant. During Rabi 2007-08 the sorghum crop whose flowering anthesis and experienced the above condition has suffered and resulted into low seeds settings. The hybrid seeds quality has no role in this aspect. The problem of low setting of seeds is experienced by the farmers in case of Jawar Seeds Ajeet 333 were attributed to the following reasons:- a) Low Temperature during night and b) Soil moisture stress c) In some cases may be because of pest problem, d) Variation in planting time and flowering time of the hybrids because of which even in the same area, varying and setting in different hybrids can be observed. The problem of low setting of seeds resulting into poor yield or failure, thus it is not due to faulty and defective seeds, but it is only due to environmental conditions particularly lower temperature i.e, below 13 C during fertilization. The Respondent Company functioning in the service of Indian Farmers since for the last 22 years and is best known for quality of seeds. These Respondents Company being a reputed company does not have any intentions to supply poor quality of seeds to the farmers. The said alleged loss caused to the complainant, due to improper cultivation and selection of seeds for wrong season and due to variation of climatic conditions, but not due to defective seeds as alleged. So there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by these Respondents. Hence for all these reasons they have sought for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost. 4. During the course of enquiry the complainant has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief reiterating the contents of his complaint. In rebuttal the Respondent No-1 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as RW-1 reiterating the contents of his written version. On behalf of Respondent No-2 to 4 the sworn-affidavit of Respondent No-4 as RW-2 has been filed by way of examination-in-chief reiterating the contents of their written version. On behalf of complainant (7) documents have been got marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-7. The respective Respondents have not adduced any documentary-evidence. It is significant to note here that on 07-01-09 during the course of arguments, the LC for the Respondent No-1 disputed the Voucher/Bill at Ex.P-2 as the date mentioned there-on is over written and also disputed the signatures of Respondent No-1 on this voucher Ex.P-2. In this background the Forum directed Respondent No-1 for producing office copy of the Bill Book pertaining to the Ex.P-2 maintained by the Respondent No-1 in the course of his business. On 15-01-09 the LC for the Respondent No-1 submitted that the document/bill book called for from Respondent No-1 is mis-placed and so he is not in a position to produce the same. 5. Heard the arguments of counsel for respective parties and perused the records. The following points arise for our consideration and determination: 1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service by the Respondents, as alleged?. 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for?. 6. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1. In the affirmative. 2. As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO.1:- 7. There is no dispute that the Respondent No-1 is the dealer and Respondent No-2 to 4 are the Producer & Manufacturer of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds. It is also not in dispute that the complainant has purchased (3) packets containing 3 Kgs of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds on 13-10-07 vide Receipt No. 375 from Respondent No-1. The Respondent No-1 in the first part of Para-6 of his written version and Respondent No-2 to 4 in Para-3 of their written version, have admitted that the complainant has purchased Ajeet 333 Hybrid Jawar Seeds from Respondent No-1, produced and manufactured by them. As stated earlier during the course of argument, the LC for the Respondent No-1 disputed the signatures of the Respondent No-1 on the bill at Ex.P-2 dt. 13-10-07 and this date is over written. But when the Respondent No-1 was directed to produce the entire Bill book showing the office copy of the bill at Ex.P-2, so as to compare the disputed signatures of Respondent No-1 on Ex.P-2, the LC for the Respondent No-1 submitted that the Bill book is missing and unable to produce the same. There apart the Respondent No-1 has not taken any further steps by producing his admitted signatures on any of the transactional business books maintained by him during the course of his business. Under these circumstances it follow that the Respondent No-1 has failed to prove the disputed signatures on Ex.P-2 and with regard to the date of purchase of the seeds as shown on 13-10-07 is over written. Further-more the complainant in Para-2 of his complaint itself has stated that he has purchased the Jawar Seeds for Rabi season on 13-10-07. The respective Respondents in their written version have not disputed the date of purchase of the seeds as alleged by the complainant. Under these circumstances it goes to show without any hesitation that the complainant did purchase the Hybrid Jawar Seeds on 13-10-07 vide bill at Ex.P-2. 8. It is the further case of the complainant that at the time of semi maturity stage of the said crop, he noticed that there was no proper setting of seeds however he hoped that the crops would set Jawar seeds in due course of time. But the Jawar crop failed because of non-setting of seeds. During the stage of setting of seeds he along with the other ill-fated farmers requested the Respondents to visit their lands to make spot inspection but they did not turn up. So the first week of January 2008 they approached Agricultural Department and Inspector for seeds of Manvi and Raichur and Director of Agricultural Science, Gulbarga for needful action with no result. So the complainant and other farmers sent the requisition to the University of Agricultural Science. The Assistant Director of Research, Raichur visited the lands of the complainant & other farmers and gave his report to the complainant and also forwarded the same to Joint Director of Agricultural Science at Raichur. The complainant has produced the copy of the said report at Ex.P-3 with list of the land owners whose lands were inspected. In this list the name of complainant finds place at Sl.No-13 showing his land Sy.No. 363, date of sowing of seeds as on 20-10-07 as reported by the farmer, and purchase of Hybrid Jawar Seeds from Respondent No-1 with bill number & date. It also shows 30 to 40 percentages of seeds setting. 9. The LC for the Respondent argued that the Record of Rights of the land by the complainant at Ex.P-1 shows paddy crop was grown in the said land so the contention of the complainant that he had sowed the Hybrid Jawar Seeds in his land is false one. Ex.P-1 the Record of Rights of the land Sy.No. 362 of complainant shows the paddy crop grown in the land for the relevant period. The LC for the complainant argued that the computer extract of Record of Rights shows paddy crop but in-fact Jawar crop was grown in the land of complainant. Further the Inspection report of the University of Agricultural Science Dharwad at Ex.P-3 shows the land inspected by the said Authority and the name of the complainant find place at Sl.No. 13. It also shows that the Hybrid Jawar was grown in the land of the complainant and 30 to 40 was seeds setting. So the Record of Rights at Ex.P-1 is not fatal to complainant. As seen above the Report of University of Agricultural Science Dharwad, shows that they had inspected the lands of the aggrieved farmers including the land of the complainant as per list of visited lands enclosed to the report. More-over Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version at Para-8 have admitted that Concerned Authority visited the land and submitted the report before the Joint Director of Agricultural Science Raichur. This in-turn shows that the Respondents have admitted the factum visit of his land of the complainant and report submitted by them at Ex.P-3. This report shows the Jawar Seeds of the Respondents product was grown in the land and there was 30 to 40 percentage of seeds-setting and so the contention of the Respondents that paddy was grown in the land as per Record of Rights at Ex.P-1 does not stand to reason and hence the Report Ex.P-3 being contrary to the contents of Record of Rights Ex.P-1 regarding standing crop, so no presumptive value is to be attached to the Record of Rights. This Report Ex.P-3 among other things further states that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds is not suitable for Rabi season in the area grown. This means the Hybrid Jawar seeds were sown/grown in the Rabi season. The complainant in Para-2 of his complaint has stated that he had purchased (3) packets of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds for Rabi season on 13-10-07 vide bill at Ex.P-2 and that seeds were sown in October 2007 itself. The Respondent No-1 in his written version Para-6 has admitted the purchase of seeds by the complainant from his shop. But he has specifically denied that the seeds were purchased are for Rabi season and as a matter of fact the complainant has voluntarily purchased the seeds for Khariff season. The Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version at Para-12 have stated that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds are recommended only for Khariff cultivation but not for Rabi season and that the said recommendation is displayed on each seed package itself. From these averments in the written version, it specifically shows that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds are to be sown only in Khariff season and not in Rabi season. When this is so we are at a loss to know as to how these seeds were supplied by the producer Respondent No- 2 to 4 for marketing to the dealers for selling for Rabi season and how Respondent No-1 sold there seeds for Rabi season. So they cannot shirk their responsibility by saying that on the seeds package there is a written warning that the seeds for sowing in Khariff season only. If the seeds are recommended for cultivation in Khariff season then why they kept them for sale in the Rabi season. Merely because there is instruction of Recommendation for cultivation in Khariff season, it does not suffice that they are not at fault especially when generally the farmers are illiterate persons and they do not know instruction written on the packge. When the Jawar seeds was recommended for Khariff season then the acts of the Respondents in marketing and selling those packages for Rabi season not only amounts to deficiency in their service but also their illegal acts and unfair trade practice. So from a close perusal, it goes to show that Respondent No-1 dealer and Respondent No- 2 to 4 the producer & manufacturer of Hybrid Jawar seeds both have ignored their responsibility of adhering to the instructions shown on the seeds packages and let-loosed for marketing and selling the seeds packages for Rabi season contrary to the instructions shown on the packages. So if all these factors are taken into account not it only amounts to deficiency of service but also shows unfair trade practice on the part of the Respondents which resulted the poor illiterate farmer like the complainant to purchase the Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds and to sow in Rabi season resulting loss. Thus the acts of Respondent in supplying of Hybrid Jawar Seeds which was recommended for Khariff season but selling it for Rabi season to the complainant also amounts to supply of defective seeds as alleged. Hence we hold that the complainant has proved deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents and therefore Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 10. The complainant in Para- 11 of his complaint has stated that he has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and he has expected good yield and income from the crop and that due to failure of crops he sustained loss of more than Rs. 80,000/-. He has sought for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- including cost of litigation. Except this bare averments of complaint, the complainant has not substantiated by any cogent and convincing material regarding investment made by him at Rs. 10,000/- per acre and his sustaining loss of Rs. 80,000/- and claiming for Rs. 6 Lakh. The complainant in Para- 2 of his complaint has stated that the other farmers who had used and sown the other company seeds of Jawar have got good yield of 35 quintals of jawar per acre and got the market rate of of Rs. 1700/- to 1800/- per quintal. But except these averments the complainant has not produced any piece of evidence to show as to who are those farmers who purchased the other company Jawar seeds and got 35 quintals of yield per acre in their lands and got a sale proceeds at Rs. 1700/- to 1800/- per quintal . So in the absence of any substantial piece of evidence it cannot be said that the complainant has established, the contention in para-6 of his complaint. Similarly the complainant has only stated that he has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and sustained loss of more than Rs. 80,000/- but he has not even produced any material to show that he had purchased pesticides, manure, fertilizers, etc., by investing amount to grow Hybrid Jawar Seeds in order to get good yield. In the absence of the same we are not in agreement with the contention of the complainant that he had invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre so also there is no material on record to substantiate his claim for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- towards loss. However, in-view of our discussion and finding on Point No-1, in the light of the report of University of Agricultural Science Dharwad at Ex.P-3 that he had grown the Sorghum Hybrid Jawar Ajeet 333 Seeds in his land and could not get yield, we feel it just and proper to award a total compensation of Rs. 1,15,000/- towards loss and damages including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order: ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. The Respondents 1 to 4 jointly and severally shall pay a total compensation of Rs. 1,15,000/- towards loss and damages including cost to the complainant. The Respondents shall comply this order within (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 27-01-09.) Sd/- Sri. N.H. Savalagi, President, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Sri. Gururaj, Member, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath, Member. District Forum-Raichur.

JUDGEMENT By Sri. N.H. Savalagi, President. This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act by the complainant Shivarudrappa against the four Respondents for deficiency of service. The brief facts of the complaint are as under: The complainant is the owner & possessor of agricultural land bearing Sy.No. 362 measuring 12 acres 31 guntas situated at Bagalawad village, Tq. Manvi, District Raichur. On 13-10-07 he purchased three packets of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Seeds (Jawar seeds) for Rabbi season each containing 3 Kgs from Respondent No-1 produced & manufactured by Respondent No-2 to 4 vide Bill No. 375. He sown the seeds and planted in his entire land in the month of October-2007. After following all precautionary measures for growing the said seeds and by applying requisite fertilizers and pesticides. He had invested huge amount for preparation of soil, removal of weeds etc., as per instructions given on the packet of the seeds. At the time of semi maturity stage of the said Jawar crop he noticed that there was no proper setting of seeds. However he hoped that the crop would set the seeds with the passage of time but the crops failed because of non-setting of seeds. Similar was the fate of other farmers who had grown the brand of Jawar seeds in their lands. He could not harvest the crop due to complete failure. The other farmers who had used Jawar Seeds of other company have got good yield like 35 quintal per acre and sold the Jawar at the market price of Rs. 1700 1800 per quintal and got hand some profit. But this complainant and other farmers who had used the seeds of the Respondent Company viz., Brand of Ajeet 333 have lost the crop and incurred huge loss. The failure of the Jawar crop of the said brand of seeds supplied by the Respondents was published in eminent news paper like Kannada Prabha. During the stage of setting of seeds of Jawar crop after opening husk, the complainant & other farmers brought to the notice of Respondents to visit their field in question to make spot inspection but they did not turn up. Further during the first week of January 2008 the complainant and other farmers requested the Inspector of seeds Agricultural Department Manvi and Raichur in the matter but not yielded any result. So they requested the Director of Agricultural Science, Gulbarga for needful action even there was no response. As such the complainant and other farmers sent a requisition to the University of Agricultural Science, and Assistant Director of Research, Raichur visited the field of the complainant and other farmers and gave report to the complainant and also forwarded the other report to Joint Director of Agricultural Sciences Raichur. The Respondents have made wide publicity about the quality of their Hybrid Seeds and made the farmers like the complainant to believe that their Jawar seeds would give yield about 34 to 38 quintal per acre. But in-fact the brand of seeds were defective and entire crop failed. The complainant has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and he had expected good yield and income. Due to failure of crops for the defective seeds, he sustained loss of more than 80,000/-. This act of Respondents in supplying defective seeds amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. Hence for all these reasons the complainant has sought for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- including cost. 2. In-pursuance of service of notice Respondent No-1 appeared through Sri. Mallangouda Advocate and Respondent No- 2 to 4 appeared through Sri. T.M. Swamy Advocate and have filed separate written version. The Respondent No-1 in his written version has contended that the entire reading of complaint does not disclose any cause of action and deficiency of service on the part of this Respondent No-1. This Respondent is only a dealer of seeds produced by Respondent No- 2 to 4, as such there is no deficiency of service on the part of this Respondent. The allegations that the complainant is the owner & possessor of agriculture land bearing Sy.No. 362 measuring 12 acres 31 guntas situated at Bagalawad village Tq. Manvi, are not within the knowledge of this Respondent. The allegation in Para-2 of the complaint with regard to purchase of seeds by the complainant from this Respondent No-1 is not disputed. But it is specifically denied that the seeds purchased are for Rabbi season. As a matter of fact, the complainant has voluntarily purchased the seeds for Khariff season. The complainant at no point of time has approached this Respondent with regard to his grievance as contended in Para-3 to 11 of his complaint. The complainant has un-necessarily involved this Respondent No-1 without any cause of action and deficiency in service. Hence for all these reasons he has sought for dismissal of the complaint against him with exemplary cost. 3. Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version have stated that the averments at Para- 2 of the complaint to the extent that the complainant has purchased the products Hybrid Ajeet Seeds 333 of these Respondents from Respondent No-1 is true. The averments made in Para- 3 & 4 of the complaint are not within the knowledge of these Respondents hence denied. The averments in Para- 5 & 6 of the complaint are imaginary and speculative and not based on cogent evidence hence denied. It is denied that these Respondents have not cared for the requests of the complainant regarding complaints made by him. The concerned Agriculture Authority visited the lands and submitted report before Joint Director of Agricultural Science Raichur, wherein it is not alleged that the failure of crop was due to alleged defective seeds supplied by these Respondents only, but it was due to other factors as stated therein. It is specifically denied that these Respondents assured about the yield per acre. The averments regarding loss of income per acre as stated in Para-11 of his complaint are imaginary and speculative and not based on cogent evidence. The Respondents have not adopted any unfair trade practice and are not deficiency in service to the complainant. It is submitted that neither Respondent N-1 nor Respondent No-2 to 4 advised the complainant and sold the alleged seeds for sowing during Rabi season and was not advised by any Respondents for such sowing. The package of pocket speaks about the characteristics, quantity of seeds to be applied and the period of sowing and about safeguard against the diseases, pests and insects. When such precautions taken by the Respondents it is denied that there was any lapse, negligence unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the Respondents. The complainant and other farmers who have sown the seeds of variety have completely over looked the advise and literature submitted along with the seeds. The complainant and other farmers who had purchased the seeds of the variety might have sown them in paddy fields which are irrigated. The other farmers including the complainant with an intention to reap second crop might have sown them after the paddy crops. Being the paddy fields, already with more moisture retained in the lands have suffered cold stress during flowering stage. It is further submitted that the hybrid Jawar Ajeet 333 seeds is breed and recommended only for Khariff cultivation and not for Rabi. The said recommendation is displayed on each sealed package itself. However because of the good grain quality of these Respondents Company the farmers in the past have grown this hybrid variety in Rabi season and got good yield under normal season. Apart from that in the Athnur village Tq. Manvi few farmers who have grown same variety of Jawar Seeds which was in right time have got good yield, therefore the allegations made against the products of these Respondents are without any cogent evidence. The initial high temperature at planting stage followed by low temperature during subsequent month coupled with increasing soil moisture stress affects the growth of bio-mass of the plant. During Rabi 2007-08 the sorghum crop whose flowering anthesis and experienced the above condition has suffered and resulted into low seeds settings. The hybrid seeds quality has no role in this aspect. The problem of low setting of seeds is experienced by the farmers in case of Jawar Seeds Ajeet 333 were attributed to the following reasons:- a) Low Temperature during night and b) Soil moisture stress c) In some cases may be because of pest problem, d) Variation in planting time and flowering time of the hybrids because of which even in the same area, varying and setting in different hybrids can be observed. The problem of low setting of seeds resulting into poor yield or failure, thus it is not due to faulty and defective seeds, but it is only due to environmental conditions particularly lower temperature i.e, below 13 C during fertilization. The Respondent Company functioning in the service of Indian Farmers since for the last 22 years and is best known for quality of seeds. These Respondents Company being a reputed company does not have any intentions to supply poor quality of seeds to the farmers. The said alleged loss caused to the complainant, due to improper cultivation and selection of seeds for wrong season and due to variation of climatic conditions, but not due to defective seeds as alleged. So there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by these Respondents. Hence for all these reasons they have sought for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost. 4. During the course of enquiry the complainant has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief reiterating the contents of his complaint. In rebuttal the Respondent No-1 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as RW-1 reiterating the contents of his written version. On behalf of Respondent No-2 to 4 the sworn-affidavit of Respondent No-4 as RW-2 has been filed by way of examination-in-chief reiterating the contents of their written version. On behalf of complainant (7) documents have been got marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-7. The respective Respondents have not adduced any documentary-evidence. It is significant to note here that on 07-01-09 during the course of arguments, the LC for the Respondent No-1 disputed the Voucher/Bill at Ex.P-2 as the date mentioned there-on is over written and also disputed the signatures of Respondent No-1 on this voucher Ex.P-2. In this background the Forum directed Respondent No-1 for producing office copy of the Bill Book pertaining to the Ex.P-2 maintained by the Respondent No-1 in the course of his business. On 15-01-09 the LC for the Respondent No-1 submitted that the document/bill book called for from Respondent No-1 is mis-placed and so he is not in a position to produce the same. 5. Heard the arguments of counsel for respective parties and perused the records. The following points arise for our consideration and determination: 1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service by the Respondents, as alleged?. 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for?. 6. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1. In the affirmative. 2. As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO.1:- 7. There is no dispute that the Respondent No-1 is the dealer and Respondent No-2 to 4 are the Producer & Manufacturer of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds. It is also not in dispute that the complainant has purchased (3) packets containing 3 Kgs of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds on 13-10-07 vide Receipt No. 375 from Respondent No-1. The Respondent No-1 in the first part of Para-6 of his written version and Respondent No-2 to 4 in Para-3 of their written version, have admitted that the complainant has purchased Ajeet 333 Hybrid Jawar Seeds from Respondent No-1, produced and manufactured by them. As stated earlier during the course of argument, the LC for the Respondent No-1 disputed the signatures of the Respondent No-1 on the bill at Ex.P-2 dt. 13-10-07 and this date is over written. But when the Respondent No-1 was directed to produce the entire Bill book showing the office copy of the bill at Ex.P-2, so as to compare the disputed signatures of Respondent No-1 on Ex.P-2, the LC for the Respondent No-1 submitted that the Bill book is missing and unable to produce the same. There apart the Respondent No-1 has not taken any further steps by producing his admitted signatures on any of the transactional business books maintained by him during the course of his business. Under these circumstances it follow that the Respondent No-1 has failed to prove the disputed signatures on Ex.P-2 and with regard to the date of purchase of the seeds as shown on 13-10-07 is over written. Further-more the complainant in Para-2 of his complaint itself has stated that he has purchased the Jawar Seeds for Rabi season on 13-10-07. The respective Respondents in their written version have not disputed the date of purchase of the seeds as alleged by the complainant. Under these circumstances it goes to show without any hesitation that the complainant did purchase the Hybrid Jawar Seeds on 13-10-07 vide bill at Ex.P-2. 8. It is the further case of the complainant that at the time of semi maturity stage of the said crop, he noticed that there was no proper setting of seeds however he hoped that the crops would set Jawar seeds in due course of time. But the Jawar crop failed because of non-setting of seeds. During the stage of setting of seeds he along with the other ill-fated farmers requested the Respondents to visit their lands to make spot inspection but they did not turn up. So the first week of January 2008 they approached Agricultural Department and Inspector for seeds of Manvi and Raichur and Director of Agricultural Science, Gulbarga for needful action with no result. So the complainant and other farmers sent the requisition to the University of Agricultural Science. The Assistant Director of Research, Raichur visited the lands of the complainant & other farmers and gave his report to the complainant and also forwarded the same to Joint Director of Agricultural Science at Raichur. The complainant has produced the copy of the said report at Ex.P-3 with list of the land owners whose lands were inspected. In this list the name of complainant finds place at Sl.No-13 showing his land Sy.No. 363, date of sowing of seeds as on 20-10-07 as reported by the farmer, and purchase of Hybrid Jawar Seeds from Respondent No-1 with bill number & date. It also shows 30 to 40 percentages of seeds setting. 9. The LC for the Respondent argued that the Record of Rights of the land by the complainant at Ex.P-1 shows paddy crop was grown in the said land so the contention of the complainant that he had sowed the Hybrid Jawar Seeds in his land is false one. Ex.P-1 the Record of Rights of the land Sy.No. 362 of complainant shows the paddy crop grown in the land for the relevant period. The LC for the complainant argued that the computer extract of Record of Rights shows paddy crop but in-fact Jawar crop was grown in the land of complainant. Further the Inspection report of the University of Agricultural Science Dharwad at Ex.P-3 shows the land inspected by the said Authority and the name of the complainant find place at Sl.No. 13. It also shows that the Hybrid Jawar was grown in the land of the complainant and 30 to 40 was seeds setting. So the Record of Rights at Ex.P-1 is not fatal to complainant. As seen above the Report of University of Agricultural Science Dharwad, shows that they had inspected the lands of the aggrieved farmers including the land of the complainant as per list of visited lands enclosed to the report. More-over Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version at Para-8 have admitted that Concerned Authority visited the land and submitted the report before the Joint Director of Agricultural Science Raichur. This in-turn shows that the Respondents have admitted the factum visit of his land of the complainant and report submitted by them at Ex.P-3. This report shows the Jawar Seeds of the Respondents product was grown in the land and there was 30 to 40 percentage of seeds-setting and so the contention of the Respondents that paddy was grown in the land as per Record of Rights at Ex.P-1 does not stand to reason and hence the Report Ex.P-3 being contrary to the contents of Record of Rights Ex.P-1 regarding standing crop, so no presumptive value is to be attached to the Record of Rights. This Report Ex.P-3 among other things further states that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds is not suitable for Rabi season in the area grown. This means the Hybrid Jawar seeds were sown/grown in the Rabi season. The complainant in Para-2 of his complaint has stated that he had purchased (3) packets of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds for Rabi season on 13-10-07 vide bill at Ex.P-2 and that seeds were sown in October 2007 itself. The Respondent No-1 in his written version Para-6 has admitted the purchase of seeds by the complainant from his shop. But he has specifically denied that the seeds were purchased are for Rabi season and as a matter of fact the complainant has voluntarily purchased the seeds for Khariff season. The Respondent No- 2 to 4 in their written version at Para-12 have stated that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds are recommended only for Khariff cultivation but not for Rabi season and that the said recommendation is displayed on each seed package itself. From these averments in the written version, it specifically shows that Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds are to be sown only in Khariff season and not in Rabi season. When this is so we are at a loss to know as to how these seeds were supplied by the producer Respondent No- 2 to 4 for marketing to the dealers for selling for Rabi season and how Respondent No-1 sold there seeds for Rabi season. So they cannot shirk their responsibility by saying that on the seeds package there is a written warning that the seeds for sowing in Khariff season only. If the seeds are recommended for cultivation in Khariff season then why they kept them for sale in the Rabi season. Merely because there is instruction of Recommendation for cultivation in Khariff season, it does not suffice that they are not at fault especially when generally the farmers are illiterate persons and they do not know instruction written on the packge. When the Jawar seeds was recommended for Khariff season then the acts of the Respondents in marketing and selling those packages for Rabi season not only amounts to deficiency in their service but also their illegal acts and unfair trade practice. So from a close perusal, it goes to show that Respondent No-1 dealer and Respondent No- 2 to 4 the producer & manufacturer of Hybrid Jawar seeds both have ignored their responsibility of adhering to the instructions shown on the seeds packages and let-loosed for marketing and selling the seeds packages for Rabi season contrary to the instructions shown on the packages. So if all these factors are taken into account not it only amounts to deficiency of service but also shows unfair trade practice on the part of the Respondents which resulted the poor illiterate farmer like the complainant to purchase the Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 Jawar Seeds and to sow in Rabi season resulting loss. Thus the acts of Respondent in supplying of Hybrid Jawar Seeds which was recommended for Khariff season but selling it for Rabi season to the complainant also amounts to supply of defective seeds as alleged. Hence we hold that the complainant has proved deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents and therefore Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 10. The complainant in Para- 11 of his complaint has stated that he has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and he has expected good yield and income from the crop and that due to failure of crops he sustained loss of more than Rs. 80,000/-. He has sought for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- including cost of litigation. Except this bare averments of complaint, the complainant has not substantiated by any cogent and convincing material regarding investment made by him at Rs. 10,000/- per acre and his sustaining loss of Rs. 80,000/- and claiming for Rs. 6 Lakh. The complainant in Para- 2 of his complaint has stated that the other farmers who had used and sown the other company seeds of Jawar have got good yield of 35 quintals of jawar per acre and got the market rate of of Rs. 1700/- to 1800/- per quintal. But except these averments the complainant has not produced any piece of evidence to show as to who are those farmers who purchased the other company Jawar seeds and got 35 quintals of yield per acre in their lands and got a sale proceeds at Rs. 1700/- to 1800/- per quintal . So in the absence of any substantial piece of evidence it cannot be said that the complainant has established, the contention in para-6 of his complaint. Similarly the complainant has only stated that he has invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre and sustained loss of more than Rs. 80,000/- but he has not even produced any material to show that he had purchased pesticides, manure, fertilizers, etc., by investing amount to grow Hybrid Jawar Seeds in order to get good yield. In the absence of the same we are not in agreement with the contention of the complainant that he had invested Rs. 10,000/- per acre so also there is no material on record to substantiate his claim for awarding Rs. 6,00,000/- towards loss. However, in-view of our discussion and finding on Point No-1, in the light of the report of University of Agricultural Science Dharwad at Ex.P-3 that he had grown the Sorghum Hybrid Jawar Ajeet 333 Seeds in his land and could not get yield, we feel it just and proper to award a total compensation of Rs. 1,15,000/- towards loss and damages including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order: ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. The Respondents 1 to 4 jointly and severally shall pay a total compensation of Rs. 1,15,000/- towards loss and damages including cost to the complainant. The Respondents shall comply this order within (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 27-01-09.) Sd/- Sri. N.H. Savalagi, President, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Sri. Gururaj, Member, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath, Member. District Forum-Raichur.