Haryana

StateCommission

A/925/2015

KRISHAN KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SUBHASH AND CO. - Opp.Party(s)

GULAB SINGH

23 Nov 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

Appeal No.925 of 2015

Date of the Institution:21.10.2015

Date of Decision: 23.11.2016

 

Krishan Kumar son of Chandgi Ram, R/o village Khurana, Tehsil & District Kaithal.

                                                                             .….Appellant

Versus

 

1.      M/s Subhash & Company, Pesticides Dealer near Canara Bank Chhatrawas Road, Kaithal.

2.      Bayer Corporation, site SCO No.2, Near Karan Chowk, Central Market, Karnal.

3.      Bayer House Hira Nandani Garden, Central Avenue Powai, Mumbai-40007326.

                                                                             .….Respondents

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    Mr.Rajesh Duhan, proxy counsel for Mr. Gulab Singh, Advocate counsel for the appellant.

                    Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate counsel for the respondent No.1.

                   Mr. S.C. Thathai, Advocate counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3.

 

O R D E R

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1.      Krishan Kumar–complainant is in appeal against the Order dated 11.09.2015 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby his complaint against the M/s Subhash & Company has been dismissed as the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

2.      In brief, according to the complainant, he purchased 11 units of Allantis (Brand) pesticides from the OP No.1 vide bill No.13913 dated 18.12.2013. The complainant sprayed six units of Allantis in his six acres of land as per the instructions mentioned by the company. After spraying the pesticides in the fields, the crops were damaged to a great extent and the complainant suffered heavy loss of crops. The complainant requested the Deputy Director Agriculture, Kaithal to inspect the spot and report in respect of the damage caused to the crops. On spot inspection by the team of the Agriculture Department, it was found that 30-35% of wheat crop had been destroyed due to the use of said Allantis pesticides sprayed in the field of the complainant. Aggrieved against this, the complainant approached the District Forum claiming Rs.1,32,950/- on account of damages, Rs.5500/- as costs of filing of the present complaint etc.  

3.      Opposing the complaint, the OP-1 pleaded that the yield of any crop depends upon the seeds of quality, the agro climatic situation, kind of soil, nature of water coupled with the irrigation facilities, supply of nutrients and effective use of fertilizer etc., correct agriculture practice and use of appropriate quantity of pesticides/insecticides and its proper prescribed system of spray. Therefore, there was no deficiency in service on their part and the complainant was not entitled to any relief and compensation. Agreeing with the stand taken by the OP, the learned District Forum dismissed the complaint vide order dated 11.09.2015. 

4.      Against this impugned order dated 11.09.2015, the complainant has come up in appeal before us and has vehemently reiterated the contentions as already raised before the District Forum.

5.      We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. A perusal of the record shows that when the complainant approached the OPs with his grievance, the Agriculture Department deputed their team for taking the sample of the pesticide in dispute bearing the same batch number from their firm and sent the same to the Lab. for analysis. The report received from the Regional Pesticides Testing Lab. clearly shows that the sample conformed to the relevant specifications in the Test conducted by the Agriculture Department. Therefore, in view of the Lab. report the pesticide sold by the OP to the complainant was not of sub standard or inferior quality. Hence, the damage to the crop could not be attributed to the pesticide, but it might have been caused due to some other reasons i.e. the quality of the seeds agro climate situation, kind of soil and the supply of nutrients and fertilizers etc. No other evidence having been produced by the complainant, we do not find any merit in the complaint. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned District Forum is upheld and the Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

 

November 23rd, 2016

Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member, Addl.Bench

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

R.K.