Before the district CONSUMER forum:: west Godavari::eluru

Present:

Smt R.Seetaramamma B.Sc., B.L.,

President (FAC)

Sri S.Sreeram B.Com., B.A. B.L.,

Member

Friday, 22^nd Day of May, 2015.

Consumer complainant No.16/2010

Between

Gannamani Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Ramachadra Rao,

Hindu, Male, Aged 55 years, R/o. Chodavaram Village,

Nallajerla Mandal, W.G.Dt.,                                                      ….Complainant

And

The A.P.State Seeds Development,

Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Manager,

Tanuku, W.G.Dt.,                                                                     …Opposite party

This complaint is coming before us for final hearing on 7-5-2015 and on perusing the complaint and other material papers on record and written arguments filed by the complainant and hearing the arguments of Sri M.P.Acharya advocate for complainant and Sri P.P.C.Joshi advocate for opposite party and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this Forum made the following:-

Order

(per Sri S.Sreeram, Member)

          This is a complaint filed by the complainant under Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act against the opposite party directing to pay a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. towards loss of investment and yield caused by opposite party, to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, to pay costs and for other reliefs.

          The brief averments of the complaint are as follows:

2.       The complainant being an agriculturist having Ac.10.00 cents in Chodavaram Village of Nallajerla Mandal and he decided to cultivate black gram crop in the said land.  The complainant on 17-9-2009 purchased 80 Kgs of black gram in variety i.e. T-9 CIS from the opposite party at Rs.60/- per KG under cash bill No.D67014.  Accordingly the complainant raised black gram crop in Ac.10.00 cents and grown up the crop by applying manures and pesticides from time to time.  The complainant invested a sum of Rs.10,000/- per acre.  The harvesting period for said crop is 70 to 80 days from the date of raising crop.  In spite of that, there is no blooming in the black gram plaints after expiry of due date.  The complainant made several requests to opposite party to visit the land and give suitable suggestions to him, but there is no response.  On 05-12-2009 the complainant made a written requisition to the opposite party to do justice, but of no use.  The opposite party sold defective seeds and as such there was no blooming in the black gram plants and thereby adopted unfair trade practice.  Due to the acts of opposite party, the complainant suffered a lot both physically and mentally apart from monetary loss.  The complainant lost his investment of Rs.1,00,000/- and crop worth Rs.2,50,000/-.  The complainant got issued a notice dt.,24-12-2009 to the opposite party and the opposite party received the same, but kept quiet.  Hence, the complaint.

3.       After registering the complaint, notices were sent to the opposite party. The opposite party filed version denying the material allegations made against it and contended that the complainant can raise black gram in Ac.10.00 cents as per the quantity purchased by him.  It is further contended that the complainant never informed them about crop condition and regarding non blooming of plants.  The opposite party received a letter dt. 5.12.2009 and immediately directed the field supervisor to inspect the lands who in turn inspected the lands on 19.12.2009 in the presence of complainant and submitted report that the crop was severely damaged due to fest with “SPODOPETERA” “MAURUCA AND MOSAIC DISEASE” where the insect eats away the flower buds and that the complainant refused to sign on report.  It is further contended that the subject matter of seeds were also sent to Laboratory and the reports reveals that the seeds are standard one.  It is further contended that there are so many factors like water, weather, soil condition, using of fertilizers etc., for less yield and finally prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4.       The complainant filed his chief affidavit reiterating the material averments of the complaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A6 on his behalf.  The Manager of opposite party filed chief affidavit and got marked Ex.B1 to B7.

5.       Heard both sides.  Perused the written arguments submitted on behalf of complainant.

6.       Now the points that stood for consideration are

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in selling defective seeds of black gram to complainant?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
3. To what extent?

Point Nos.1 and 2

7.       The undisputable facts in this case are that the complainant purchased black gram seeds of T-9 CIS variety from the opposite party on 17-9-2009 under Ex.A1 cash bill No.67014 for Rs.4,960/-.  The main grievance of the complainant is that he is having Ac.10.00 cents of land at  Chodavaram Village of Nallajerla Mandal and he raised black gram in Ac.10.00 cents of land a by investing Rs.10,000/- per acre and also followed all the measures like applying manures and pesticides.  It is further case of complainant is that though the harvesting period is 70 to 80 days, there was no blooming of plants and thereby the opposite party sold defective seeds.  Though the complainant informed the said fact to the opposite party by way of written requisition under Ex.A2 with a request to visit the land and supervise the same, but there is no response from it.  The complainant got issued legal notice under Ex.A4 to opposite party, which was received under Ex.A3 postal acknowledgment.  In this regard, the contention of opposite party is that immediately after receipt of representation under Ex.A2, they deputed the field supervisor to inspect the land who in turn inspected the land on 19-12-2009 and submitted report that the crop was severely damaged due to fest with “SPODOPTERA” “MAURUCA AND MOSAIC DISEASE” where the insect eats away the flower buds and that the seeds are tested by Laboratory and certified as standard.  As such there is no unfair trade practice on their part.  In support of their contention, the opposite party got marked Ex.B1 to B7.  Ex.B1 is the results issued by A.P. State Seed Certification Agency, Hyderabad for the year 2009-2010 where under the varieties of black gram purchased by complainant are noted as ‘Standard’.  Ex.B2 Seed Analysis report dt.30.9.2009 issued by APSSDC Ltd., Q.C. Lab, Vijayawada also discloses that the black gram variety purchased by complainant as ‘standard.  Ex.B3 is the letter addressed by opposite party to the Filed Supervisor to inspect the lands of complainant and another farmer regarding the non flowering and non podding of black gram T-9 variety.  Ex.B4 is the first inspection report dt.19.12.2009 given by field supervisor by mentioning the reason for non blooming of black gram.  Perusal of Ex.B4 also discloses that the farmer/complainant has not taken precautionary measures to prevent the damage.  Ex.B5 is the letter addressed by Mandal Agricultural Officer, Nallajerlal to the opposite party stating that the crop was severely affected with yellow mosoic virus. Ex.B6 is the letter addressed by co-ordinator, District Agricultural Advisory and Transfer of Technology Center, Eluru to the opposite party where under it is stated that the ‘Yellow mosoic virus’ as observed by MAO., Nallajerla under Ex.B5 is not a seed borne disease.  Perusal of Ex.B1 to B6 marked on behalf of opposite party discloses that the seed varieties purchased by complainant from the opposite party are standard one. To rebut the same, the complainant has not chosen to send the samples of varieties of same lot to the Laboratory for analysis as provided in the Act.  Except the oral averments that the opposite party sold defective seeds, there is no oral or documentary evidence.  Further as per Ex.B4 and B5 inspector reports, the crop damaged due to severe “Yellow Mosoic Virus” which was certified that the same is not seed borne disease as per Ex.B6.  As such the seeds sold by opposite party are not sub-standard one and they are certified as standard by the Laboratories.  Further the complainant not filed any affidavits of farmers who purchased the same variety of seeds to substantiate his contention that the seeds are substandard one.  The complainant also not gave any complaint to Agricultural Officers regarding the sale of substandard seeds.

8.       In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that there is no unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party.  As such the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs as sought for in the complaint.

Point No.3

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed but without costs.

Dictated to the Shorthand writer transcribed by her and corrected and pronounced to by me on this the 22^nd day of May, 2015.      

    Sri S.Sreeram                                Smt R.Seetaramamma                              

             MEMBER                                       PRESIDENT(FAC)

Appendix of evidence

Witness examined

For complainant               :  Evidence affidavit of complainant

For opposite party     :         Evidence affidavit of opposite party

For complainant        :

For opposite parties:

President (FAC)