Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/31/2016

K.P.Palaiah S/o Palaiah - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorised Signatory,Padmashree Agro Tech Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Shri.C.M.Veeranna

18 Jan 2017

ORDER

 

 

COMPLAINT FILED ON:25.04.2016

DISPOSED      ON:18.01.2016

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:31/2016

 

DATED:  18^th JANUARY 2017

PRESENT :- SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                   B.A., LL.B.,

SRI.N. THIPPESWAMY           MEMBER

                                 B.A., LL.B.,   

K.P. Palaiah, S/o Palaiah, Agriculturist, Chikkagondanahalli village, Turuvanur Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk & District.   By Sri. C.M. Veeranna, Advocate)	……COMPLAINANT/S
V/s
1. The Authorized Signatory, Padmashree Agro Tech Limited, Sy.No.4, Bandamilaram village, Mulugu Mandal, Medak District, Hyderabad-502 336.   2. The Authorized Signatory, Sri Shankari Fertilizers, Dealers of Fertilizers, Seeds, Pesticides, Medehalli Road, Chitradurga-577 501.   (By Sri. G.B. Thippeswamy, Advocate)	…..OPPOSITE PARTIES

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH    PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to pay compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a, Rs.10,000/- towards costs and such other relief.

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, he is an agriculturist by profession and owning agricultural land in different survey numbers at Chikkagondanahally and Soornahally village of Chitradurga Taluk.  OP No.1 is the manufacturer of Asian 3M SK Maize Seeds and OP No.2 is the dealer of the above said Maize Seeds.  Being an advertisement and at the instance given by the OPs about the above said seeds manufactured by OP No.1, nearly 25 quintals per acre yield to be come up etc., the complainant has purchased 30 packets each containing 5 Kg by paying Rs.300/- per packet in all a sum of Rs.9,000/- vide MAH Batch on 24.06.2015  from OP No.2 and sowed the said seeds in his 20-Acres 35-Guntas of land situated at Chikkagondanahally and Sooranahally village. It is further stated that, after sowing the above said seeds, the complainant has given fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides and water in time as recommended by the OPs.  After two months of sowing the said seeds, complainant learnt that, there was a problem like pre-mature sprouting, low yield and less qualities in the said seeds and on enquiry found that, the seeds sold by the OPs are low quality produced by OP No.1.  It is further stated that, being suspecting the defectiveness of the seeds, approached the concerned Horticulture and Agriculture Department by filing an application on 09.10.2015 and in turn the Officers of the said Department visited the lands of complainant along with Expert Committee Members/Scientists.  After thorough inspection they told the complainant that, the crop was failed because of the sub-standard and defective seeds supplied by the OPs and they informed to the Scientists about the failure of the crop.  It is further stated that, after obtaining the information from the complainant and the Agricultural Department, the Senior Scientists visited the lands of complainant on 21.10.2015 and submitted the report stating that, the crop was failed due to the defective seeds.  The complainant has knowing fully well about the management practice of the Maize crop.  The lands of the complainant are fertiled and having good soil for growing Maize crop and he has grown 25 quintals per acre every year and the complainant has expected the yield to the extent of 500-600 quintals to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/-. The complainant has spent Rs.2,00,000/- towards fertilizers, manure, pesticides and miscellaneous expenses, in all he has suffered loss to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/-. So, the OPs have committed deficiency of service by supplying the defective seeds and so this complaint has been filed for the above said reliefs and etc., and prayed for allowing the complaint. 

3.      On service of notices, OP 2 has appeared through Sri. G.B. Thippeswamy, Advocate and filed version.  Notice sent to the OP No.1 returned as refused, hence placed ex-parte.  The OP No.2 filed version denying the averments made in para-1 to 6 of the complaint.  It is stated that, the Horticulture and Agricultural Department along with expert committee members/Scientists have not visited the lands of complainant and not issued any report to the complainant.  Complainant has created concocted reports to get more compensation.  It is further stated that, OP No.2 is only a dealer and sells the products supplied by OP No.1.  OP No.2 has supplied good quality/quantity of maize seeds to the complainant along with other customers but, it has not received any complaint from any customers regarding the bad quality of maize seeds.  Therefore, it is not liable to pay any compensation as prayed for by the complainant and it is only the OP No.1, the manufacturer of the maize seeds is liable to pay compensation for the sub-standard seeds if any.  It is further submitted that, the complainant has not followed the proper instructions of the OP No.1 and other experts namely supply of water and fertilizer.     The OP No.2 has not done any mistake and it is not liable to pay any damages to the complainant as alleged and therefore, there is no deficiency of service on its part and prayed for dismissal of the complaints.

4.      Complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing the affidavit evidences and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-6 were got marked. One Sri. B.E. Yogaraj, the Sales Executive of OP 2 has examined as DW-1 by filing the affidavit evidence and document has been marked as Ex.B-1.   

5.      Arguments heard on both sides.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the Maize seeds purchased by him from the OP No.2, manufactured by OP No.1 are defective and he has suffered loss and thereby OPs have committed deficiency of service and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaints?

              (2) What order?

 

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative.

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

 

                        REASONS ON POINT NO.1

 

8.      It is not in dispute that, OPs 1 and 2 are the manufacturer and dealer of Asian 3M SK Maize Seeds.  Complainant is an agriculturist by profession and owning agricultural lands situated at Chikkagondanahally and Sooranahally village in Chitradurga Taluk.  Being an advertisement and at the instance given by the OP No.2 about the above said seeds manufactured by OP No.1 that, the yield will be nearly 25 quintals per acre etc., the complainant has purchased 30 packets each containing 5 Kg by paying Rs.9,000/- vide MAH Batch on 24.06.2015  from OP No.2 and sowed the said seeds in his 20-Acres 35-Guntas of land situated at Chikkagondanahally and Sooranahally village.  After sowing the above said seeds, the complainant has given fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides and water in time as recommended by the OPs.  After two months it was learnt that, there was a problem with the said seeds i.e., pre-mature sprouting, low yield and less quality.  On enquiry it was found that, the seeds sold by OP No.2 and manufactured by OP No.1 are low quality.  Complainant approached the concerned Horticulture and Agriculture Department by filing an application on 09.10.2015, they visited the lands of complainant along with Expert Committee Members/Scientists and after inspection they told the complainant that, the crop was failed because of the sub-standard and defective seeds supplied by the OPs.  Complainant has knowing fully well about the management practice of the Maize crop and he has grown 25 quintals per acre every year and the complainant has expected the yield to the extent of 500-600 quintals to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/-. The complainant has spent Rs.2,00,000/- towards fertilizers, manure, pesticides and miscellaneous expenses, in all he has suffered loss to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/- due to the supply of defective seeds and so this complaint has been filed. 

 

9.      In support of his contention, the complainant has filed their affidavit evidence and reiterated the contents of each complaints and relied on the documents like Records of Right belongs to complainant marked as Ex.A-1, receipt dated 24.06.2015 for having purchased maize seeds by paying Rs.9,000/- marked as Ex.A-2, letter written by the complainant to the Assistant Director of Agriculture marked as Ex.A-3, Office copy of Legal Notice dated 26.03.2016 marked as Ex.A-4, Postal receipts marked as Ex.A-5 and 3 Photos marked as Ex.A-6. 

  10.  On the other hand, it is argued by the OP No.2 that, the Horticulture and Agricultural Department along with expert committee members/Scientists have not visited the lands of complainant and not issued any report to the complainant.  Complainant has created concocted reports to get more compensation.  OP No.2 is only a dealer and sells the products supplied by OP No.1.  OP No.2 has supplied good quality/quantity of maize seeds to the complainant along with other customers but, it has not received any complaint from any customers regarding the bad quality of maize seeds and it is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant and OP No.1, the manufacturer of the maize seeds is liable to pay compensation for the sub-standard seeds if any.  It is further argued by the OP No.2 that, the complainant has not followed the proper instructions given by the OP No.1 and other experts.  OP No.2 has not done any mistake and it is not liable to pay any damages to the complainant and there is no deficiency of service on its.

 

11.    In support of its contention, OP No.2 has filed affidavit evidence of its Sales Executive and reiterated the contents of version and relied on the document like Form-C i.e., Renewal of Seeds License marked as Ex.B-1.

 

 

            12.   On hearing the rival contentions of both parties and on perusal of the documents including the affidavit and documentary evidence, it is clearly made out that, the complainant has purchased the Asian 3M SK Maize Seeds from the OP No.2, the dealer and OP No.1 is the manufacturer by paying an amount of Rs.9,000/- vide receipt No.2171 dated 24.06.2015 as per Ex.A-2 and sowed the same in his lands measuring 20-Acres, 35-Guntas situated at Chikkagondanahally and Soornahally village in Chitradurga Taluk.  At the time of selling the said seeds, the OPs gave an assurance that, the same will give good yield.  Complainant took all the necessary steps for the growth of maize, but inspite of his best efforts and careful supervision, the there was a problem of pre-mature sprouting, low yield and less quality.  The complainant approached the Horticulture and Agriculture Departments who visited the land of the complainant and opined that the maize seeds were defective in quality.  The complainant has spent huge amount for cultivation of the crop, pesticides, fertilizers etc., because of supply of defective seeds, he suffered mental agony and financial loss.  Now a days it is very difficult for the farmers to cultivate the lands because, the labour charges, the price of fertilizers, pesticides are very high.   However, the act of the OPs in supplying the defective seeds amounts to deficiency in service which causes mental agony, financial loss and harassment to the complainant.  The farmers are the Annadata to the Nation so, the farmers are liable to be compensated.  Because of supplying defective seeds to the complainant by the OPs, complainant failed to get good yield which caused mental agony and financial loss, for which the complainant is liable to be compensated.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that, it is just and proper to award Rs.35,000/- per acre to the complainant, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- being the costs of the proceedings.  With this, we answer Point No.1 partly in the Affirmative. 

 

            13.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

 

ORDER

            It is ordered that, the above complaint filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of C.P Act are hereby allowed in part.

            It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- as compensation to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization. 

            It is further directed the OPs to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

          It is further ordered that, the OP is hereby directed to comply the above order within 45 days from the date of this order.

            (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 18/01/2016 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures.)    

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                    PRESIDENT

ANNEXURES:

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs in all the Complaints:

DW-1:  Sales Executive of OP 2 by way of affidavit evidence. 

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

 

01	Ex-A-1:-	Record of Rights (3 in number belongs to complainant)
02	Ex-A-2:-	Receipt dated 24.06.2015 for having purchased maize seeds
03	Ex-A-3:-	Letter written by the complainant to the Assistant Director of Agriculture
04	Ex-A-4:-	Office copy of Legal Notice dated 26.03.2016
05	Ex-A-5:-	Postal receipts
06	Ex.A-6:-	3 Photos

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01

Ex-B-1:-

Renewal of Seeds License

 

 

MEMBER                                                    PRESIDENT

Rhr**