Date 01/11/2012

          O  R  A  L    O  R  D  E  R 

Per Mr.K.B.Gawali, Hon`ble  Member.

1.       This appeal is preferred by the original opponent No. 1 and 2 who are the seed manufacturing company and Manager of the said Seeds Company respectively against the judgment and order dated 18/07/2007 passed by the Dist. Forum, Ahmednagar in C.C. No. 90/2007.

          The respondent No. 1 who is the farmer and original complainant ( herein after termed as “Complainant”.)  whereas the respondent No. 2  is the dealer of the said seed company. By way of the impugned judgment and order the  Dist. Forum has partly allowed the complaint and directed the appellant seed company to pay to the complainant  compensation of Rs 10,000/- along with Rs 2000/- towards mental agony and Rs 1000/- cost of the complaint.

2.       The brief facts of the complaint of the complainant are that he is a farmer having 1.68 H of land in G.No. 292/3/D of the village Savedi Ahmednagar. It is the case of the complainant that with intention to take the crop of Onion he had purchased onion seed on 14/07/2006 from the respondent No. 3 as produced  by the appellant seed company and paid Rs 1350/- for the same.  That, he sown the said seeds and after developing those seeds in to seelings they  were planted in his above said land covering the area of 40 R. It was avered that inspite of taking all  precautionary measures  such as applying required  dosage of fertilizers, pesticide, watering etc. There was found development of jolts and joint onions having about 50 % proportion in the said  onion crop. He therefore initially made complaint with the respondent No. 3 to visit the spot and assured to inform the same to the appellant seed company. He contended that due to such jolted and joint onion he had sustained loss of about Rs 80,000/-. It was further submitted that he filed complaint dated 05/01/2007 with the Dist. Agricultural Officer. Accordingly, the District Seed Committee visited the spot on 19/01/2007 and inspected the crop. That, as per committees report the development of jolt and joint onion was due to the defective seeds. On the basis of District Committee’s  said report he  therefore filed complaint to the Dist. Forum seeking direction to the appellant seed company and the dealer to pay him compensation of Rs 80,000/- with interest @ 18 % p.a. and Rs 50,000/- towards mental harassment and Rs 5000/- as cost of the complaint.

3.       The appellant and the respondent No. 2 i.e. dealer had appeared before the Dist. Forum resisted the claim through their written version dated 02/04/2007. The facts of sale of disputed seed by the respondent No. 3 as produced by appellant No. 1 and 2  was not disputed. However other claims have been denied. It was submitted that the panchanama as drawn by the Dist. Seeds Committee has not been made as per government guidelines issued by  the circular dated 10/06/1982. It was further submitted that the land  which was said  to have been put under onion planation by the seed committee  measuring at  0.43 H. has no basis because as per 7/12 record the area 0.40 H. was jointly sown under the fruit trees of Chiku, orange and onion. It was also the  contention that the development of jolting and joint onion can not be attributed only to the seed but to  other  agro-climatic condition, such as type of soil, quantum of water provided to the crop, dosage of fertilizer etc. It was also contended that the disputed seed were tested and only after confirming their purity the same have marketed. Hence, it was submitted that the complaint being false and baseless be dismissed.

4.       The Dist. Forum after perusal of the record and hearing the parties by way of its judgment and order has partly allowed the complaint holding the appellant seed company as liable to pay compensation. The respondent No. 2 i.e. dealer of seeds having sold the seeds in packed condition, has been discharged from its liability by the Dist. Forum.

5.       Aggrieved by the said judgment and order the present appeal is filed in this Commission by the appellant seed company. Notice was served on the respondents and appeal was kept for final hearing on 25/09/2012. Adv.Shri.O.S.Tipole was present for the appellant whereas the Adv.Shri.Y.V.Kakade was present for the respondent No. 1 i.e. complainant. None was present for the respondent No. 2. we heard both the counsel at length and appeal was reserved for judgment and order.    

6.       It was submitted by the learned counsel  Shri.Tipole for appellant that the Dist. Forum has placed its reliance on the Dist. Committees report. But there is no affidavit of any of the members of the committee in support of its  report. Secondly in  7/12 record the onion crop is shown as an inter crop along with fruit trees of Chicku and orange. However the committees report is silent on this point. The photograph on record does not shows that the onion crop was taken as the inter crop along with the fruit trees. It was also contended by the learned counsel that the members of the Dist. Committee did not follow the guide lines given  by the government in respect of such inspection and hence, the said report of the committee has no any evidentiary  value. It was therefore averred that the Dist. Forum without considering all these points has  erroneously passed the impugned judgment and order which requires to be quashed and set aside.

7.       On the other hand the learned counsel Shri. Y.V.Kakade for the complainant submitted that the Dist. Seeds committee which has been specifically appointed to enquire in to the complaints about the seeds by  the government, has given clear remarks about the defectiveness of seed. He further contended that the photograph of the said onion crops which are placed on record also shows the jolting of the onion and it was well proved that the seeds purchased were defective. He therefore contended that there is no substance in the appeal and same may be dismissed.

8.       We have perused the material  placed before us as well as considered the aforesaid oral submissions as advanced  by both the learned counsels. We have two major questions for our consideration and decision. One is whether the allegation about deficiency in service is proved against the appellant seed company and secondly whether the compensation as awarded by the Dist. Forum is appropriate and proper.

9.       As regards the first question about deficiency in service we find that the appellant seed company has not disputed the fact  that the seed purchased  are produced by it and that  the respondent No. 2 is its authorised dealer from whom the complainant has purchased the said seed. It was contended by the seed company that the Dist. Seed committee has not ascertained the land where in the complainant had planted the crop of onion, as the 7/12 record shows inter crop of onion with the fruit trees of Ciku and Orange. However, the member of the seed committee have themselves visited the spot and drew  the panchanama on 09/01/2007 and further detail inspection of the said crop was done on 19/01/2007, which is a direct evidence. As per the Dist. Committees report the area under onion plantation is shown  as 0.43 H  and that as per complaint it is almost the same i.e. 0.40 H.  It is also not the case of the complainant that he planted onion as the intercrop between fruit trees of Chiku and Orange. Therefore only because there is some  different entry in 7/12 record regarding  cultivation of  crop, it does not invalidate  the observation made by the members of Dist. Seeds committee. The perusal of the said  report reveals that the committee has inspected and verified proportion of jolting, joint onion, white and under seized onion, by way of  random sampling method as suggested by government and on that basis has arrived at  the conclusion  of defective seeds. The Dist. Committee’s conclusion about defective seeds has not been rebutted by the appellant seed company by way of any cogent  evidence. The photograph placed on record by the complainant also support the remarks of the Dist. Committee about the existence of said jolting.

10.     Thus on the basis of Dist. Committees report it is very well proved that the seeds were defective and hence as concluded by the Dist. Forum the appellant seed company  can  be  said to have committed deficiency in service. In this regard we rely on “National Seeds Corporation Ltd – Versus – Naliya Narsinhrao reported in II ( 2009) CPJ 24 (NC)” in which it is held by the National Commission that the crop failure can be attributed to the defective seeds supplied by the petitioner  as proved by  local commissioner’s report and expert comments. In the  present case the Dist. Seed committee which consist of expert from agricultural field has clearly given their remarks about defectiveness of the seed hence appellant seed company is liable to pay the compensation.

11.     Now, as regards the point of compensation as observed by the Dist. Forum due to defective seeds the  complainant could not get the expected  yield of standard onion. As per committees report the proportion of standard onion is only about 40 % and the rest of the onion consists of jolts, joint onion white onion and under sized onion. As per the contention of the complainant he could not also  get the prevailing rate but the reduced rates for the remaining 60 %  of onion and hence he claimed compensation of Rs 80,000/- towards loss of expected  yield. However, the complainant has not produced on record the total quantity of sub standard onion and also the rate at which the said onion could fetch in the market. Therefore, in absence of any cogent evidence  regarding  actual loss caused to the complainant we find that the compensation as awarded by the Dist. Forum at Rs 10,000/- is reasonable and proper.

12.     In view of the aforesaid facts and observations we find no merits in the present appeal and hence we do not want to interfere with the order passed by the Dist. Forum. In the result we pass the following order.

O   R    D    E   R

1.                 Appeal is dismissed. 

2.                 No order as to cost.

3.                 Copies of the judgment and order be sent to both the parties.