By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite party for an Order directing the opposite party to pay compensation towards the loss sustained to the complainant due to the deficiency of service of opposite party.
2. Brief of the complaint:- On 12.07.2014 complainant purchased 65kg of Uma Seeds as per bill No.1876 from the opposite party. The rate per kg was Rs.38/- and the total bill amount was Rs.2,470/-. The complainant cultivated 1.75 acres of field during this period and assessed the expense for this cultivation as Rs.50,000/-. While the plants were grown up the complainant noticed some differences in height, growth and yield of the plants. Complainant alleged that this opposite party sold mixed seeds as per the label of Uma seeds. In the last year this complainant got 43 quintal of yield from this field. But there is no chance of getting better production this year, due to the low quality of seeds. Complainant informed this matter to the opposite party and the President of the opposite party society had visited complainant's paddy field and assured that he is ready to provide 65kg of seeds free of cost for next cultivation. The complainant further alleged that he got only 12 quintal of yield and sold it for Rs.1,400/- per quintal. He spend around Rs.50,000/- as expense for cultivation and received only Rs.16,800/- by way of sale of the yield. Complainant alleges that due to the unfair trade practice of the opposite party he caused heavy loss and damages. His sole livelihood depends on the income from the agricultural cultivation. Due to the supply of low quality mixed seeds this complainant sustained heavy loss and damages and filed this complaint.
3. On being served opposite party field version by denying all the allegations in the complaint. Opposite party admitted that he had visited the paddy field as per the information by the complainant that the Uma seeds supplied by them are of mixed one. But opposite party denied the allegation that he offered 65 kg of seeds for next cultivation. At the time of inspection of opposite party the plants are of same stage of growth but he noticed slight difference in the type of plants. Again opposite party stated that if there is any mixing in seeds they are not answerable to that, they have purchased this seeds from Agro seeds, Sinduvally, Nanjangud, Mysore District, Karnataka. There is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the part of them.
4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the side of opposite party?
2. Relief and cost.
5. Point No.1:- Complainant filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1. Ext.A1 to A4 documents were marked. Commissioner's Report is marked as Ext.C1. Ext.A1 is the Cash bill dated 12.07.2014. Ext.A2 is the Paper publication. Ext.A3 is the copy of complaint in C.C.20/2015 and Ext.A4 is the Report filed by Agricultural Officer (Commissioner Report in CC/20/2015). Opposite party also filed affidavit and examined as OPW1. Heard both sides, on perusal of the documents and evidence put forth before us we found that complainant purchased seeds from opposite party as per Ext.A1. Admittedly the president of the opposite party inspected the paddy cultivated field and deposed that some differences in the seeds. Also in Ext.C1 Commissioner stated that crops are of ripening and he noticed differences on plant height and panicle length noted indicating off types and so it is not Uma variety alone. There is an admixture of 2-3 varieties and majority of plant in each hills have plant characters of UMA variety. Plants with more height are off types could not be traced to varietal status, the variety could not be identified only by physical appearance and he recommends further lab test. Even if the opposite party raised non joinder plea the complainant had not taken any steps to implead the manufacturer, and a few sample of yield not send for lab test even though the commissioner recommended for lab analysis. The complainant failed to produce any bills or evidence to prove that the yield are of poor. But on going through the Commission Report and evidences advanced before us this Forum found that complainant sustained loss and damages during the cultivation by using the seeds purchased from opposite party. Hence we found that there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite party. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since the point No.1 is found in favour of complainant, he is entitled to get cost and compensation.
In the result, complaint is partly allowed opposite party is directed to pay Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) as compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) as cost of the proceedings to the complainant. This Order must be complied by the opposite party within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled for interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the whole amount.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 24th day of August 2015.
Date of Filing: 19.11.2014.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/- MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Raju. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:-
OPW1. George. President, Wayanad Fruits and Vegetable Marketing Ltd,
Sulthan Bathery.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Bill. Dt:12.07.2014.
A2. Paper Publication.
A3. Copy of complaint in C.C.20/2015.
A4. Copy of Report filed by Agricultural officer, Mananthavady.
C1. Commissioner Report.
Exhibits for the opposite party:-
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
