THE DISTRICT CONSUMER’S FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri.Y.Reddappa Reddy, M.A., L.L.M., President,
And
Smt.S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Monday the 16th day of March, 2015
C.C.No.95/2014
Between:
M.Ramachandrudu,
S/o M.Gopal Das,
Aged about 48 Years,
Hindu, Cultivation,
R/o H.No.3-99, Ulindakonda Village and Post,
Kallur Mandal,
Kurnool District. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. The Proprietor & Dealer,
M/s New Sri Venkata Ramana Fertilizers,
Shop No.51-8C, Mubarak Complex,
Opp. Market Yard, Near New Bus Stand,
Kurnool City-518 003.
2. The Manager,
Prabhakar Hybrid Seeds,
No.2, Sri Saraswathi Complex, II Cross,
III Main Road, Gandhi Nagar,
Bengalore-560 009,
Karnataka State. …OPPOSITE PARTIES
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.G.Narayana Swamy, Advocate for complainant and Sri.M.L.Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate for opposite parties 1 and 2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt.S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member,)
C.C. No.95/2014
1. This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying:-
(a)To pass an award in favour of complainant and as against the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of failure of Crop.
(b)To pass an award for a sum of Rs.30,000/- for mental agony and depression of complainant..
(c)To pass an award to pay interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the amount awarded since date of claim to date of actual payment.
(d)To award the costs.
And
(e)To grant such other relief as the Honourable Forum may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under: The complainant is a farmer by occupation and resident of Ulindakonda village of Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District, owing Ac.2-47cents land. Opposite party No.1 is the Dealer in seeds Fertilizers in Kurnool opposite party No.2 is the manufacture of many varieties of Hybrid seeds, Karnataka. The complainant used to purchased seeds and fertilizers from opposite party No.1 since Four years. On 23.12.2013 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2014 he purchased the Ridge gourd seeds, variety of Saniya-4 for an amount of Rs.2,760/- + Rs.880/- + Rs.220/- = Rs.3,860/- from opposite party No.1. The said seeds were supplied by opposite party No.2 under lot No.33. The complainant sowed the seeds in his land in an extent of Ac.1-10 cents in Survey No.360/1 in Ulindakonda Village of Kallur Mandal, Kurnool. The complainant used to cultivate the Ridge gourd since Four years and getting normal income from his crops. But this year due to defective sub-standard seeds, he did not get normal income, because the vegetable of Ridge gourd, which were produced in the land were hallow in nature and the consumers did not came forward to purchase the same. Inspite of all care taken by the complainant in the management growing the crop, due to defective variety of seeds, the complainant got loss of income at Rs.70,000/- and invested Rs.30,000/- towards purchase of seeds, fertilizers and wages of coolies. The complainant requested Agricultural Officer, Kallur Mandal and made written representation regarding the defective seeds supplied by opposite parties. The said Agricultural officer visited the field and suggested an advice to approach the District Consumer Forum. One Razack another farmer also purchased the same seeds and Ridge Gourd from the opposite parties and sowed in his land and also got loss. Due to said defective seeds there is no proper germination, growth and fertility in the plants of Ridge gourd. Thus the complainant suffered mental agony. Though the complainant got issued legal notice to opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 on 11.03.2014 calling then to pay the expenditure incurred for cultivation Rs.30,000/- and loss due to defective seeds Rs.70,000/- and to pay compensation at Rs.30,000/- for mental agony. Both the parties received the notice but did not give reply for it. Hence this complaint.
3. Opposite party No.2 adopted the counter of opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.1 filed counter stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is admitted that the complainant purchased the Ridge gourd seeds from opposite parties on 23.12.2013, 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2014 for an amount of Rs.3,860/-. It is submitted that the complainant raised the said Ridge Gourd during the summer season because he was purchase the seeds on 23.12.2013, 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2013. So the said seeds does not raise during Rabi season “The Healthy Growth of the crop and its yielding much depends on preparation of the land for sowing, water management, climate, fertilizer and pesticide etc., The alleged representation given to the Agricultural Officer is created one. The seeds purchased by the complainant is not defective or sub-standard so the opposite parties did not given any reply to the alleged notice received from the complainant. There is no cause of action for filling this complaint. The complainant filed this complaint with intent to get wrongful gain. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant filed Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked and sworn affidavit of complainant and third party affidavit of Pinjari Razack (CW-2) is filed. Sworn affidavit filed by opposite party No.1. No document is marked.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- It is the case of the complainant that he purchased the Ridge gourd seeds, variety of Saniya-4 on 23.12.2013, 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2014 for an amounts of Rs.3,860/- (Rupees Three thousand eight hundred and sixty only) from opposite parties and sowed the same in an extent of Ac.1-10 cents in survey No.360/1 in Ulindakonda village of Kallur Mandal, Ex.A1 is the cash receipts dated 23.12.2013, 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2014 showing the purchase of Ridge gourd seeds by the complainant from opposite party No.1 Ex.A2 is the Adangal Extract issued by Mee-Seva dated 05.07.2014. Ex.A3 is the photos of complainant Agricultural land. The complainant in his sworn affidavit stated that, due to the defective and sub-standard seeds, the Ridge gourd which were sowed in his land were produced hallow in nature without useful to the consumers. Even though he took all steps of better management he got loss of Rs.70,000/-. He made representation to Agriculture officer Kallur Mandal on 24.02.2014, which is marked Ex.A4. The officer visited his field and suggested to approach District Consumer Forum. Though complainant got issued legal notice to opposite parties 1 and 2 dated 11.03.2014, it is marked as Ex.A5, the opposite parties acknowledged the same under Ex.A6 and Ex.A7, they did not gave reply for the said notice. One Pinjari Razack, farmer, resident of Ulindakonda Village of Kallur also purchased the same variety Ridge gourd seeds from the opposite parties and he also got loss due to defective seeds. The photo copy of loan eligibility card of said Razack is marked as Ex.A8.
The opposite party No.1 stated in his sworn affidavit that the complainant raise the Ridge gourd crop during Rabi Season does not arise because as per Ex.A1 cash bill he purchased the said seeds in the month of December 2013 and January 2014. The seeds purchased by the complainant from opposite parties were not defective or sub-standard. The representation given to Agricultural officer on 24.02.2014 Ex.A4 is created for the sake of this complaint. The affidavit of said Pinjari Razack that he had purchased Ridge gourd seeds from opposite parties and got loss. Since he is a friend of complainant so he gave false affidavit. It is further case of opposite parties that the crop in the land of the complainant gave less yield because of poor crop management change in climate conditions.
8. The learned counsel appearing for opposite parties contended that as per his Adangal (document No.8) he sowed the ridge gourd during Rabi season but under Ex.A1 cash bill the seeds were purchase between 23.12.2014 to 08.01.2014. The complainant has not produced any quantity of seeds in question to send the same for analysis or test Under Section 13 (c) of Consumer Protection Act. The complainant has not produced any evidence that he could not get expected yield and that he incurred any expenditure for cultivating the crop. He cited decisions reported in I (2014) CPR 543 (NC) Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds -Vs- Garapati Srinivas Rao and Another,
II (2013) CPR 703 (NC) Banta Ram -Vs- Jai Bharat Beej Company where in it was held that Germination of seeds depends upon so many factors such an appropriate period of sowing soil condition, climate lesser of lack soil, moisture, pest and disease petitioner purchase seeds for commercial purpose. So he is not a consumer. In the present case on hand the complainant purchased the seeds for his livelihood.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant argued that due to defective seeds supplied by the opposite parties the complainant got loss of income of Rs.70,000/- by raising the crops in his land and invested Rs.30,000/- towards purchase of seeds, fertilizers and wages of collies. He cited decision reported in I (2004) CPR Page 386 Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission where in it was held that sunflower crop filed to give normal yield, held manufacturer deficient in service found crop defective due to the seed. Assessment of compensation for crop loss at Rs.18,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards compensation Rs.5,00/- cost was also reasonable. Appeal dismissed.
Admittedly the complainant purchased Ridge gourd seeds between 23.12.2013 to 08.01.2014 under Ex.A1 from opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.2 is the manufacturer of the seeds, and opposite party No.2 is the dealer of said seeds the complainant purchased the seeds from opposite party No.1, and he sowed the same in Acre1.10 cents in survey No.360/1, Ex.A2 is Adangal Extract issued by Mee-Seva dated 05.07.2014. As per Ex.A2 it is clear that he had a well in his land for the supply of sufficient water to the said crop. According to the complainant inspite of taken all care in growing the crop, due to defective variety of seeds, the complainant got loss of income. He made a representation to the Agricultural officer, Kallur Mandal on 24.02.2014 under Ex.A4, he visited the field and advise to approach District Consumer Forum. Another farmer by name Pinjari Razack also purchased the same seeds from opposite parties and also he got loss. He gave an affidavit regarding the effect and in support of the complainant version. The photo copy of his loan eligibility card is marked Ex.A8. But the opposite parties did not choose to Cross-Examine him. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 11.03.2014 (Ex.A5) and received by opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 Ex.A6 and Ex.A7. They did not gave reply for the said notice.
According to the complainant he gave complaint to Agricultural Officer, Kallur Mandal regarding his poor yielding crop in his land and got loss, and he visited the field and suggested to approach District Consumer Forum. The complainant stated the same fact at the earliest point of time in his legal notice dated 11.03.2014 issued to the opposite parties. It is a fault of Agricultural Officer not given any report after his visit. The farmer complainant was not at fault, for which he should not be allowed to suffer. The complainant filed another farmer affidavit by name Pinjari Razack in support of his case to prove that the same seeds purchased from the same opposite parties and sowed in his land and also got loss. The opposite parties are at liberty to recall and Cross Examine him. But they did not take any steps to recall him and Cross examine him. Thus the facts stated in his affidavit are considered to be admitted facts. We persued all the material available on record we hold that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties for supplied the inferior quality of seeds to the complainant. Due to the negligent attitude of opposite parties the complainant is a poor farmer suffered mental agony.
10. POINT No.iii:- The complainant prayed for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of failure of crop and Rs.30,000/- for mental agony and depression of complainant with 24% interest, but it is excessive. We consider all the material facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that the complainant is entitled the price of seeds Rs.3,860/- and Rs.10,000/- for loss of crop and Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony with interest at 9% from the date of complaint i.e., on 17.06.2014 to till the date of realization.
11. In the result the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.3,860/- the price of seeds (Ridge Gourd) and Rs.10,000/- for loss of crop and Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony with interest at 9% from the date of complaint i.e., on 17.06.2014 to till the date of realization along with Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the complaint. Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 16th day of March, 2015.
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties:- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Cash Bill Receipts (Nos.3) issued by New Sri Venkata Ramana Fertilizers, Kurnool dated 23.12.2013, 25.12.2013 and 08.01.2014.
Ex.A2 Adangal Extract issued by Mee-Seva dated 05.07.2014.
Ex.A3 Two Photos (Nos.2) of Agricultural land of complainant.
Ex.A4 Representation Letter dated 24.02.2014 to Mandal Agricultural Officer, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District.
Ex.A5 Legal Notice dated 11.03.2014.
Ex.A6 Acknowledgement of opposite party No.1.
Ex.A7 Acknowledgement of opposite party No.2.
Ex.A8 Photo copy of Loan Eligibility Card.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:- Nil
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
