Haryana

StateCommission

A/850/2015

NATIONAL HORTICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAVINDER SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

VISHAL GUPTA

17 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      850 of 2015

Date of Institution:      07.10.2015

Date of Decision :       17.08.2016

 

1.     National Horticulture Research and Development Foundation, having its Head Office at Chitegaon Phata, Nasik-Aurangabad, Post Darna Tal Niphad, Nasik (Maharashtra) through its authorised signatory.

2.     National Horticulture Research and Development Foundation, Village Salaru Post Darar, District Karnal through its authorised signatory.

3.     National Horticulture Research and Development Foundation, Narnaul, through its authorised signatory.

                            Appellants-Opposite Parties

Versus

Ravinder Singh s/o Sh. Kunwar Singh, Resident of Village Kanina, Tehsil and District Mahendergarh, Haryana.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member   

 

Present:               Shri Amit Gupta, Advocate for appellants.

                             Shri S.K. Yadav, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

          This Opposite Parties’ appeal is directed against the order dated August 31^st, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Narnaul (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby complaint filed by Ravinder Singh-complainant/respondent, was accepted directing the opposite parties as under:-

“1.     To make the payment of 3550 kilogram seeds at the rate of Rs.25/- per kilogram plus subsidy to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint till realization.

2.      To pay Rs.2200/- as litigation charges to the complainant.”    

2.                Ravinder Singh-complainant/respondent, entered into an agreement (Annexure R-3) with National Horticulture Research and Development Foundation-Opposite Parties/appellant, to produce seed of Pea (P. Pargati variety).  Both the parties were bound by the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement (Annexure R-3). The appellants were to procure the seed at the rate of Rs.40/- per kilogram.  It was agreed that if the seed did not meet the minimum seed certification standards, the appellants shall return the same back to the respondent-complainant at his own cost. 

3.                The respondent-complainant supplied seed to the appellants-opposite parties in May, 2011. The seed produced by the respondent-complainant did not meet the minimum seed certification standard vide report (Annexure R-9 & R-10). So, the appellants-opposite parties vide letter No.714 dated 20.08.2011 (Annexure C-2/R-11) asked the complainant to lift the seed. The complainant got notice (Annexure C-4) served upon the appellants-opposite parties through counsel. He also wrote a letter dated September 15^th, 2011 (Annexure A-6) showing his willingness to sell the above said seed to the appellants @ Rs.25/- per Kg besides subsidy, as mentioned in “Seed Receipt Form” (Annexure C-3). The appellants accepted the seed vide Annexure C-3 but did not pay the agreed amount at the rate of Rs.25/- per Kg. plus subsidy for 3550 Kgs of seed received. Hence, complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed before the District Forum.

4.                The opposite parties-appellants, contested complaint by filing written version. It was stated that the lot of the sample of the seed was sent to laboratory of Haryana State Seed Certification Agency for testing and the seed did not meet the minimum seed certification standard, vide report (Annexure R-9 & R-10). So, the complainant was asked to lift the seed but he did not come forward. Thus, denying any kind of deficiency in service, it was prayed that the complaint be dismissed.  

5.                After evaluating the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the District Forum accepted complaint and issued direction to the appellants-opposite parties as detailed in paragraph No.1 of this order.

6.                Counsel for the parties have been heard. File perused.

7.                Indisputably, the opposite parties were to get the Pea seed produced from the complainant with certain required standard mentioned in the agreement (Annexure R-3) entered into between the complainant and the opposite parties. As per Clause 10 of the agreement, it was agreed that if the seed produced did not meet the minimum seed certification standards, the same shall be returned back to the complainant. Clause 10 of the agreement reads as under:-

“10.   If the seeds do not meet the minimum seed certification standards, the same will be returned back to the Party of the Second Part at his/her own cost.” 

8.                It is not disputed that seed not conforming to standard, the opposite parties-appellants vide letter No.714 dated 20.08.2011 (Annexure C-2/R-11) asked the complainant to lift the seed. It is also not disputed that thereafter vide “Seed Receipt Form” (Annexure C-3), it was agreed that the appellants-opposite parties would pay at the rate of Rs.25/- per Kg. plus subsidy for 3550 Kgs of seed received. Clause 12 of the “Seed Receipt Form” (Annexure C-3) reads as under:-

“Note:         25.00 Kg + subsidy payment up to 30.9.11 as per Agreement 15.9.11”

9.                Though the seed did not meet the required standard, as it contained excess moisture level, yet since the appellants-opposite parties agreed to pay reduced rate of Rs.25/- per Kg as against the initially agreed rate of Rs.40/- per Kg, therefore the opposite parties were liable to pay to the complainant at the said rate. The seed is undisputedly with the appellants-opposite parties. The District Forum has thus rightly directed the opposite parties to pay at the reduced agreed rate of Rs.25/- per Kg. for 3550 Kgs seed.

10.              In view of the above, the impugned order does not call for any interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of merits.

11.              The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Announced 17.08.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL