Haryana

Ambala

CC/160/2016

Amandeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sharma Beej Co. - Opp.Party(s)

Ripanjit Singh

08 Jan 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 160 of 2016

                                                          Date of Institution         : 21.03.2016

                                                          Date of decision   : 08.01.2018

 

 

Amandeep Singh son of Mahinder Singh, resident of Village Suraj Shahed, Shahzadpur, District Ambala. 

    ……. Complainant.

 

Vs.

 

Sharma Beej Company, New bus stand Shahzadpur, District Ambala (Through its prop) Trarsem lal Sharma.

 

       ….…. Opposite Party.

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Member.

Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.                           

 

Present:       Sh. Ripanjeet Singh, Advocate for complainant.

                   Sh. B.S. Garg, counsel for OP.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant  purchased Hybrid Maize seed of Pioneer company from Sharma Beej Company, Shahzadpur vide bill no. 942 dated 28.02.2015 for Rs. 4,000/- through on line showing method and put 50kg. bag of DAP 100 kg. 2 bags of Urea per acre and also sprayed insecticide and weedicide well  in time. But on growing the seed, it was found that it is not original Hybrid maize seed but is a duplicate one. Due to giving duplicate seed  by the OP, made  a complaint on 21.05.2015 in the Agriculture Department, Ambala. The concerned Department constituted a committee to visit the fields. The concerned department constituted a visit the fields on 01.06.2015 and gave its examination report. At the serial no.1 of the report Agriculture Department committee  mentioned that height of the plants is normal and every plant has one cob on it. In this connection it is said that the height of the plant was not normal. So far as one cab on each plant is concerned it is said that we  may sow any seed of maize  it may be duplicate or any other variety that will also  bear one cob. It is also said that original hybrid  pioneer seed plants  have two even  three cobs one each plants. At  Sr. No.3  of the report is mentioned that same plants were damaged by blue bulls and insect pest in this regard it is said that why the committee members did not told us that  these plants were damaged by Blue Bulls and inspect  pest  at the time   of visit there was no loss of plants due to abovesaid reasons. Because we guard the maize fields day and night with help of dogs and we sprayed the insecticide and weedicide also well in time.

As mentioned at Sr. No.4 of the report of the agriculture department about the lack of management it is said that there was no lack of management as we put DAP and urea in needful quantity and sprayed well in time to control weeds and pests  as committee also admits at Sr. No.2 of the report. As per Sr. no. 5 of the report committee  mentioned  that the field loss can occur due to rain also. In this regard it is said that the rain was useful to the maize crop instead of harmful. There was no such heavy rain which might have caused harmful to the maize crop and total loss is more than 90%  per acre not 18-22% as mentioned by committee.  In this way, due to duplicate seed, we suffered great economic loss as we ploughed the fields six times before sowing the maize we sprayed the weedicide and insecticide on maize crop. Irrigation expenses and look after the crop from the blue bulls for three months and ourselves  and crop fields loss. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, Op appeared through counsel and filed written statement submitting that the Maize seeds purchased by the complainant were original seeds. The said seeds were purchased by the OP from Lal Chand and Vijay Kumar Distributor, Naraingarh from pioneer company and the company has not been arrayed as party in this case. As per the report given by the Agricultural Department the seeds were not found to be duplicate and no fault that the plants were normal. The report submitted by the Agricultural Committee is clear to the effect. It is further submitted that the complainant has taken subsidy from the Haryana Govt. and subsidy was transferred in the account of complainant to the tune of Rs. 6000/- Now, the complainant  cannot say that the seeds was of inferior quality. There are many factors and circumstances regarding to the plants such as Blue Bulls and insect and due to heavy rain and due to the un-normal temperature. So the loss, if any, was not due to their poor quality of seeds Therefore, there is no deficiency on the party of OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X with documents as annexure C-1 to C-2 and close his evidence. On the other hand, Counsel for the OP has tendered affidavit as Annexure RA alongwith documents Annexure R1 to R-6 and close his evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the both the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

   5.                Counsel for complainant argued that the duplicate seeds in question was given by OP and on growing the seeds it was found that it was not original hybrid maize seed. Due to this reason the complainant made a complaint on 21.05.2015 to the Agricultural Department, Ambala and  concerned department  constituted a committee  to visit the fields of the complainant on 01.06.2015. The Agriculture Department Report (Annexure C-1) on which the complainant heavily replied upon shows that there was 18 -22% loss per acre  but the committee has also opined that we  can  ascertain  that this percentage loss is lonely due to seed only as is there is good plant  population in the field. Yield loss can also occur due to frequent rainfall in the past few months & also due to poor drainage system  in the field. The committee also opined  that in variety Pioneer 1844, the growth  of the plant  are uniform,  normal height, stalk strong  and having  one cob on each plant. The committee further observed that in these  fields of maize  there  was some lack of management  in respect of  weed control, pest control etc, and they also  mentioned in the report that some plant in the field are damaged by blue bull  and insect pest  which also reduces plants  growth  and yield  loss.

Main stress of the complainant is that such type of hybrid maize  of Pioneer company gives two or three cops in each plant as per literature given by the OP at the time of purchase of  the seed  but this plea  is contrary to the  Agricultural report  because one plant keeps only one cop, therefore,  it cannot be said that the seed allegedly sold by the OP to the complainant was of the substandard quality because it is not disputed  seeds have grown uniformly and  there was good plant population also. The complainant in his pleadings has mentioned that he had sown the seeds as per the instructions mentioned  on the literature but he has not produced said literature/ booklet on the case file to  corroborate his version, therefore, this Forum has no option but  to consider the report of Agricultural Officers. Perusal of the report of the Agricultural Department, Ambala reveals that the loss to seed only as is  there is good plant  population in the field yield loss  can also occur due to frequent rainfall in the past few months & also due to poor drainage system in the field. In the present case, the inspection has been done by the Officers of the Department of Agriculture of the State Government who are supposed to be knowledgeable person and expert in the field of agriculture production. At the block level and the sub-block level, departmental officers are posted to see the grievances of the rural people pertaining to that particular department and they are supposed to have basic knowledge of the concerned departmental subjects. There is nothing on the file to show that the Officers  while giving the Agricultural Report (Annexure C-1) were partial and said report has been prepared in order to cause loss to the complainant.

8.                          Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case the complainant has not been able to prove his case against the OP by leading cogent and reliable evidence. Accordingly, we dismiss the present complaint leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room

 Announced on : 08.01.2018                                                      (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                       President

 

    

                   (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                      Member

(ANAMIKA GUPTA)

           Member

 

.