This order shall dispose of Revision Petitions No.3134 and 3135 of 2009 since the facts involved in both the revision petitions are

-2-

the same.  Facts are being taken by Revision Petition No.3134 of 2009.

          Respondent/complainant had purchased 7 bags of wheat seeds  of PBW-343 from Jakholi Co-opposite party Credit & Service Soceity Limited, respondent No.2 herein, who was the dealer, @ Rs.430/- per bag and had sown the seeds in their fields.  According to the respondents, they had taken required agricultural operations but the germination of the seeds was very less.  They informed the Agriculture Department who appointed an Agricultural Officer to inspect the fields.  Sub-Divisional Agricultural Officer along with Agriculture Development Officer inspected the fields and recorded their opinion that the seeds supplied were of poor quality and of sub-standard;  only 25% to 30% seeds germinated in different fields.  Respondents filed the complaint before the District Forum.

          District Forum vide its order dated 18.11.2003 allowed the complaint and issued following directions to the petitioner:

-3-

         “Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent are directed to pay Rs.27900/- (45 quantialx620) as loss of wheat, Rs.1290/- (430x3) for cost of seeds and Rs.3360/- as cost of fertilizers total amounting to Rs.32550/- to the complainant Sh. Rajesh Kumar).  Rs.26040/- (42 quantialX620) as loss of wheat Rs.1290 (430X3) for cost of seeds and Rs.1260/- as cost of fertilizers total amounting to Rs.28590/- to the complainant Satwayan s/o Sh. Pala Ram and Rs.31000/- (50 quantialx620) for loss of wheat Rs.1290 (430X3) for cost of seed and Rs.1260 as cost of fertilizers total amounting to Rs.33550/- to the complainant Sh.Satyawan s/o Sh. Chhottu Ram.  Rs.5000/- each is awarded to the complainants as compensation for harassment and mental agony including the costs.  Both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount to the complainants.  Complaints are accepted.  Compliance of the order shall be made within 30 days from the date of order failing which proceedings under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall be initiated against the respondents.  Parties be informed accordingly and copies of orders be supplied to the parties free of cost.”.

-4-

          Aggrieved by the order passed by District Forum, petitioners filed an appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

          District Forum as well as the State Commission relying upon the report of the Agricultural Officer allowed the complaint keeping in view the fact that the petitioners had failed to produce any expert evidence or getting it tested from any authorized laboratory.

          We agree with the view taken by the foras below.  Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “II (2005) CPJ 13 (SC) titled as Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Limited v/s Sadhu & Anr.” had allowed the appeal on the basis of report submitted by Expert Committee.  In the present case, there is no such report.  Dismissed.