BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM AT KHAMMAM

Dated this, the 9^th day of February 2018.

          CORAM:     1. Sri. P. Madhav Raja, _{B.Sc., M.Li.Sc., LL.M.,}– President

2. Sri. R. Kiran Kumar_{, B.Sc., LL.M.} – Member

C.C. No.8/2014

Between:

1. Gugulothu Lalu, S/o. Chandru, Age: 45 years, Occu:Agriculture
2. Gugulothu Narasimha, S/o. Chandru, Age: 50 years, Occu: Agriculture
3. Banothu Bhaskar, S/o. Mangya, Age: 50 years, Occu: Agriculture
4. Banothu Sakru, S/o.Lalu, Age: 45 years, Occu: Agriculture
5. Nunavath Mohan, S/o. Lachiram, Age: 45 years, Occu: Agriculture
6. Gugulothu Ramulu, S/o. Bhagavan, Age: 45 years, Occu: Agriculture
7. Peddaboina Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Krishtaiah, Age: 45 years, Occu: Agrl.
8. Darla Narasimha, S/o. Guravaiah, Age: 38 years, Occu: Agriculture
9. Manda Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. Vishwanadha Reddy, Age:32 years

All are R/o. Chandya Thanda Village, Kalluru Mandal,

Khammam District.

… Complainants

And

1. Shanmukha Fertilizers, pesticides, Seeds & General Merchant,

Main Road, Kalluru Mandal, Khammam District.

Rep. by its Proprietor Sanka Koteswar Rao.

2. Annadata Seeds, Rep. by its Manager,

Dammakkapeta Village of Huzurabad Mandal,

Karimnagar District.                                           

                                                         …Opposite parties

        This C.C. is coming on before us for hearing; in the presence of         Sri. Peddi Hayagreeva, Advocate for complainant; and of Sri. M.V. Satyanarayana, Advocate for opposite party No.2; opposite party No.1 served called absent; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Sri. R. Kiran Kumar, Member)

This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.       The averments made in the complaint are that the complainants, doing agriculture over an extent of Ac.12-00, 8-00, 2-00, 4-00, 8-00, 7-00, 12-00, 3-00 and 9-00, at (1) Survey No.213/A, 12/U, (2) 213, 212, 618, 617 (3) 604, 606 (4) 604, 606 (5) 219, 220, 225 (6) 337, 213, 215, 218 (7) 828/AA, 825/AA (8) 1141/AA, 1141/A and (9) 228/E, 226/A respectively of their respective villages.  The complainants submitted that they had purchased the paddy seeds in 7, 5, 2, 3, 6, 4, 8, 2, and 7 bags respectively from opposite party No.1, which have been germinated by opposite party No.2, for sowing in order to reap the yield of Samba Masuri quality of paddy the opposite party No. 1 by receiving an amount of Rs.6,160/- under bill No.95 (2) Rs.4,500/- under bill No.34 (3) Rs.1,760/- undr bill No. 117 (4) Rs.2,640/- under bill No.116 (5) Rs.5,280/- under bill No.14 (6) Rs.3,520/- under bill No.118 and 119 (7) Rs.10,790/- under bill No.128/- (8) Rs.3,520/- under bill No.204 and (9) Rs.6,160/- under Bill No. 178 respectively had supplied the paddy seeds of BPT 5204to the complainants.  The complainants further submitted that by reposing confidence on opposite party No.1 and 2, they planted the seeds and the plantation was utilized in their respective land, after few months, because of the existence of several variety of seeds mixed together in the given seeds, the adulteration started suffering with de-budding.  The complainants also submitted that altogether the quality of paddy after de-budding which ever has yielded lost the quality which does not fetch the price of Samba Masuri which the complainants wanted to yield in their agricultural land.  The complainants submitted that they put to loss of money, time and expected yield, as a result of purchase of seeds from the opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1, they approached the agricultural department, who inturn conducted inspection of the paddy fields, wherein the paddy was planted, and the plants were sent for analysis.  The complainants further submitted that due to the selling of the inferior and adulterated seeds in the name of best quality seeds not only amounts to cheating but also amounts to deficiency of service.  As the opposite parties No.1 and 2 are responsible for the loss sustained by the complainants by way of compensation, damages apart from the expenditure involved in raising the crop for that the complainants got issued legal notice dt. 12-11-2013 addressing the opposite parties No.1 and 2 to pay Rs.15,000/- towards compensation per acre and an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards damages per acre apart from the expenditure.  Inspite of receiving the legal notice the opposite party No.1 and 2 did not yield to the demand made through legal notice and not made efforts for inspection, for that the complainants filed this complaints distinctly to each of the complainants i.e. No. 1 to 9 for an amounts of (1) Rs.2,04,000/- (2) 1,36,000/- (3) 3,40,000 (4) 68,000/- (5) 1,36,000/- (6) 1,79,000/- (7) 2,04,000/- (8) Rs.51,000/- and (9) Rs.1,53,000/- respectively.

3.       On behalf of the complainants, the following documents were filed and marked as Ex.A-1 to A-10. 

Ex.A-1:- Photocopy of receipt No.95 for Rs.6,160/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 25-06-2013.

Ex.A-2:- Photocopy of receipt for Rs.4,500/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 22-06-2013.

Ex.A-3:- Photocopy of receipt No.117 for Rs.1,760/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 26-06-2013.

Ex.A-4:- Photocopy of receipt No.116 for Rs.2,640/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 26-06-2013.

Ex.A-5:- Photocopy of receipt No.94 for Rs.5,280/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 25-06-2013.

Ex.A-6:- Photocopy of receipt No.128 for Rs.3,750/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 26-06-2013.

Ex.A-7:- Photocopy of receipt No.178 for Rs.6,160/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 29-06-2013.

Ex.A-8:- Photocopy of receipt No.204 for Rs.1,760/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 29-06-2013.

Ex.A-9:- Photocopy of receipt No.119 for Rs.1,760/- issued by opposite party no.1, dt. 26-06-2013.

Ex.A-10:-Office copy of legal notice dt. 12-11-2013 issued by the complainants to the opposite parties No.1 and 2 along with postal receipt and acknowledgement.

The counsel for complainants filed a petition along with documents and the same was allowed on 09-10-2015, wherein the petitioners / complainants filed the documents i.e.

Ex.A-11:-Photocopy of letter received from the Joint Director,              Agriculture (FAC), Khammam dt. 19-11-2013.

Ex.A-12:-Photocopy of letter addressed by Sri. Dr. D. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, Asst. Director of Research, Regional Agriculture Research Station, Warangal to the Joint Director of Agriculture, Khammam dt. 24-10-2013.

Ex.A-13:- Photocopy of paddy field inspection report.

4.       On receipt of notice, opposite party No.2 appeared through their counsel and filed counter.  In their counter opposite party No.2 denied the allegations and averments made in their complaint.  The opposite party No.2 submitted that the complainants have not taken precautions and not taken advise from the agriculture officer prior to plantation of the seeds and also they have not taken care over the plantation of the seeds, i.e., watering, usage of manures, fertilizers and pesticides etc,.  The opposite party No.2 further submitted that, they do not admit the complainant’s sustained loss, as the seeds existence of adulterer seeds the crop supposed to reach for yielding within 90 days, 100 days and 120 days as per the adulteration started suffering with de-budding.  The opposite party No.2 also submitted that there is no evidence that the complainants had sustained loss of the crop as mentioned in the complaint.  No agriculture officer inspected the fields of any complainants and no sample or crop has not seized and sent for the scientific analysis to anywhere and no report was filed with regarding the loss of crop as mentioned by the complainants in the complaint.  The opposite party no.2 further submitted that the complainants failed to follow the conditions mentioned backside of the bill as such the opposite party No.2 is not liable to pay any damages, to the complainants and prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.

5.      Opposite party No.2 filed carbon copy of delivery challan dt.26-06-2013 and the same is marked as Exhibit B1.

6.      Written arguments of complainants filed. 

7.      Upon perusing the material available on record now the point that arose for consideration is,

Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim?

Point:

          As per the complaint averments the complainants doing agriculture over an extent of Ac.12-00, 8-00, 2-00, 4-00, 8-00, 7-00, 12-00, 3-00 and 9-00, at (1) Survey No.213/A, 12/U, (2) 213, 212, 618, 617 (3) 604, 606 (4) 604, 606 (5) 219, 220, 225 (6) 337, 213, 215, 218 (7) 828/AA, 825/AA (8) 1141/AA, 1141/A and (9) 228/E, 226/A respectively of their respective villages.  It is an undisputed fact that the complainants purchased BPT-5204 seeds from the opposite parties.  To support their case, the complainants filed cash receipts issued by opposite party No.1.  The case of the complainants is that, having purchased the seeds from opposite party No.1 and 2, sowed the seeds in their fields and provided sufficient water and taken all measures for good yielding.  Inspite of making all efforts, there is no yield in the crop and because of the existence of several variety of seeds mixed together in the given seeds, the crop started with de-budding, which caused loss of quality of the paddy which do not fetch the price of Samba Masuri, due to the seed fault.

In the present case, the complainants filed photocopies of paddy field inspection report which is marked as Exhibit A13, which is furnished by the Associate Director of Research, Regional Agriculture Research Station, Warangal dt. 24-10-2013.  As per the report, their scientists, MAOs and other officials visited the paddy filed located in Lalapuram Village of Konijerla Mandal and Pullaiah Banjara Village of Kalluru Mandal, Khammam district on 11-10-2013 and furnished their report.

As per the complainants averments the complainants are doing agriculture over an extent of Ac.12-00, 8-00, 2-00, 4-00, 8-00, 7-00, 12-00, 3-00 and 9-00, at (1) Survey No.213/A, 12/U, (2) 213, 212, 618, 617 (3) 604, 606 (4) 604, 606 (5) 219, 220, 225 (6) 337, 213, 215, 218 (7) 828/AA, 825/AA (8) 1141/AA, 1141/A and (9) 228/E, 226/A respectively of their respective villages.  The report of Associate Director of Research, Regional Agriculture Research Station, Warangal is crucial and important to decide whether they visited the crop of the complainants and the seeds supplied by the opposite parties is of good quality or defective.  In the present case the Associate Director of Research reported that their scientists visited the paddy fields located in Lalapuram Village of Konijerla Mandal and Pullaiah Banjara Village of Kalluru Mandal, Khammam District on 11-10-2013 and the schedule of the land pertaining to the land of complainants was not shown in the above report.  According to the opposite parties the crop can fail due to various reasons i.e. poor agriculture practice followed by the complainants, poor soil conditions, inadequate rain fall and use of timely manures, fertilizers, pesticides, insecticides and sprayers.  The seeds are genetically procured and thoroughly tested in the laboratories before releasing into the market and the complainants never informed the opposite parties about the condition of the crop nor made any request to them to send any person for personal inspection.

From the documents available on record, we are of the opinion that the data provided by the Associate Director of Research Ex.A-13, the land / crop of the complainants was not visited by the team of scientists and other officials as such we cannot fasten any liability against the opposite parties without the cogent evidence or field inspection report.  From the above discussion, it is crystal clear that the complainants failed to prove their case, as such this point is answered accordingly against the complainants. 

7.      In the result, the complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

            Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, on this the 9^th day of February, 2018.

                   Member             President

                                                          District Consumer Forum,

Khammam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED:-

For Complainant                                                    For Opposite party  

       None                                                                          None

DOCUMENTS MARKED:-

For Complainant                                                    For Opposite party

                   Member             President

                                                          District Consumer Forum,

Khammam.