The Secretary National Seeds Corporatin Ltd., V/S Mr. P.Siddayya S/o. Padadayya - Consumer Court Case

Karnataka

Raichur

DCFR 32/07

Mr. P.Siddayya S/o. Padadayya - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secretary National Seeds Corporatin Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

25 Jun 2008

ORDER

DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,DC Office Compound, Sath Kacheri
consumer case(CC) No. DCFR 32/07

Mr. P.Siddayya S/o. Padadayya						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Mr. Venkatesh, The Area Manager, The Secretary National Seeds Corporatin Ltd., The Secretary,						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM RAICHUR. COMPLAINT NO. DCFR. 32/07. THIS THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2008. P R E S E N T 1. Sri. N.H.Savalagi, B.A.LLB. (Spl) PRESIDENT. 2. Sri. Gururaj, B.com.LLB. (Spl) MEMBER. 3. Smt. Pratibha Rani Hiremath,M.A. (Sanskrit) MEMBER. ***** COMPLAINANT :- Mr. P. Siddayya S/o. Padadayya, Age: 59 years, Occ: Agriculture & Advocate, R/o. Purtipli 584 202, Raichur, Karnataka, India. //VERSUS// RESPONDENTS :- 1. The Secretary, National Seeds Corporation Ltd., (The Govt of India Undertaking) Beeja Bhavan Pusa Complex New Delhi- 110012 India. 2. Mr. Venkatesh, The Area Manager, N.S.C. Gunj Road, Raichur- 584 102 Karnataka. 3. The Secretary, Nujiveedu Seeds Ltd., 905 Kanch Jung Building, Bara Kamba Road, Cannought Place, New Delhi- 110 001, India. CLAIM :- For direction to Respondent No- 1 to 3 to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental loss Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony and distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total Rs. One Lakh to the complainant with interest at the rate of 25% along with cost of litigation. Date of institution :- 25-04-07. Notice served :- 07-06-07. Date of disposal :- 25-06-08. Complainant represented by In Person. Respondent No- 1 & 2 represented by Sri. T. Chandrashekhar, Advocate. Respondent No- 3 represented by Sri. G.R. Ashok, Advocate. ----- This case coming for final disposal before us, the Forum on considering the entire material and evidence placed on record by the parties passed the following. JUDGEMENT This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act by the complainant P.Siddayya against the Respondents- (1) Secretary National Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bheeja Bhavan Pusa Complex New Delhi (2) Venkatesh Area Manage N.S.C. Gunj, Road Raichur and (3) Secretary Nujiveedu Seeds Ltd., Bara Kamba, Road New Delhi. The facts leading rise to the complaint may be summed up as under:- The complainant is an agriculturist as well as Advocate by profession and he is the owner in possession of agriculture land bearing Sy.No. 78/2 measuring (4) acres (1) gunta situated within the limits of Purtipli village. It is light irrigated under Tungabhadra Project. But no water is supplied due to tailend area. So rained crops are grown in his land. The complainant has reduced his legal practice and his family members livelihood is mainly depending upon agricultural income only. He had invested Rs. 60,000/- in cash and Rs. 50 grms of gold for development of his lands. The agriculture work is operating on the bank loan facility and he is indebted to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- crop loan to the Prgathi Grameen Bank Matamari. The Respondent No-1 is a Seeds Corporation and is a Government of India undertaking. The Respondent No-2 is the Area Manager of Respondent No-1 and he is vendor of Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds to the complainant. Respondent NO-3 is a Company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 and is producer of said Bunny Seeds and vendor to Respondent No-1. The complainant wanted to grow cash crop i.e, cotton in his land to repay the bank crop loan amount. So on 17-06-05 he approached to the Respondent No-2 office to purchase Hybride cotton seeds. On enquiry Respondent No-2 had orally stated that they have Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and they are good variety as they grow big fruits and average yield per acre will be 5 to 6 quintals in rain fed the crop and 10-12 in wet crop. In the beginning upto one month no pesticides need to be sprayed to the crop and there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. The price per pocket is Rs. 450/- after deducting discount and weight would be 450 grms. Believing the Respondent-1s oral statement to be true he purchased one packet on 17-06-05 and another on 20-06-05 as per cash memo. On 09-07-05 the complainant by employing (10) women labours on payment wages of Rs. 200/- sown two packets Bunny Seeds in the two acres of his land towards northern side plot spacing 60 C.M. to 64 C.M. within a row and 100 C.M. to 110 C.M. between rows in the East-West lines and 25-30 BT Cotton seeds were also sown in the border-row towards South-West portion of his cotton field. About 22-25 seeds grown in BT cotton land and fruits well burst bolls. But Bunny cotton did not burst well. There was more than sufficient rainfall in the year 2005-06 to grow rain fed cotton crop. The complainant had spent Rs. 1,600/- for ploughing and Rs.1,400/- for removing gross. On 26-08-05 he had sown 100 kgs DAP, 50 Kgs Urea and 50 Kgs Potash. On 25-09-05 he had sown 50 Kgs Urea cotton crop. He had spent Rs.1,705/- for fertilizers and Rs. 295/- for hire and labour charges in total Rs. 2,000/-.On 12-08-05 & on 25-08-05 he has sprayed Endosulfan 35 E.C. to the cotton crop and with a gap of (15) days further he has sprayed insecticide to the cotton crop upto 10-02-06 i.e, maturity period of cotton crop. He had purchased 2½ liters Endo Sulpfan 35 EC, two liters Luphos 36, Mono Corotophus 36% SL, 250 grms Lucid 75 and Tata Aasataf 75 SP by (1) Kg, in all worth Rs. 1657 and Rs. 343/- for labouring charges. The seeds produced and sold by Respondent NO- 1 to 3 to the complainant are defective and are not of good quality. The Respondent No-2 has falsely represented that the Bunny cotton seeds are of good quality for the purpose of promoting the sale and played and un-fair trade practice on the complainant. Respondent NO-3 has not given proper and necessary information regarding the duration of the cotton crop, pest management fertilizers sowing etc., Whatever printed on the seeds packets is vague and un-practicable. Therefore Respondent No-1 & 2 being the dealers and Respondent No-3 being producer of the defective Bunny Hybride Seeds are jointly liable to pay compensate to the complainant. On 28-11-05 he gave an application to the Assistant Agriculture Officer, Raichur requesting to inspect his cotton field as the crop failed due to defective seeds. He referred the matter to the Respondent NO-2 who visited on 03-12-05 along with representative of the Respondent No-3 and two officials namely: (1) Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S. Patil of Regional Agriculture Research Station Raichur. The complainant showed them bare cotton plants having no fruits in them and some plants having fruits which did not burst well. The buds and flowers were grown on all cotton plants when the crop is of (5) months old. Two Photos of cotton seeds which were taken are enclosed. Each plant had 2-3 small and folded leaves which looked like deceased. The flowers did not bloom clearly. These are clear symptoms of defects in the seeds sold to him. Further the complainant took the Inspecting Persons to the adjacent land Sy.No. 77 wherein its owner had grown rain fed BT crop. The fruits were well burst cotton balls. After First picking there were 35 to 50 fruits in each plant other than the buds and flowers. Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S.Patil have over looked the above true facts and have given false and vague report illegally favouring the Respondents. The report is enclosed. During 2005-06 farmers in Purtpli village had grown BT cotton yielding 10-12 quintals per acre in rain fed crop and sold at the rate of of Rs. 2,300/- per quintal. BT cotton seeds pockets were sold in purtipli village at Rs. 600/- and were weighing 650 gms. The complainant could have grown 20-24 quintals of hybride cotton in 2 acres of his land if the seeds were sold by the Respondent No-2 were good quality. Whereas he had grown less than two quintals of hybride cotton in 2 acres of his land and thereby he was put to monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and also mental agony & distress for which he seeks a compensation of Rs. 49,500/-. The Raichur District is the only major cotton crop growing District in Karnataka State which has got fertile deep black soil for growing rainfed and wet cotton crops. There was a co-operative spinning mill within 3 kms from Raichur which was recently liquidated for want of cotton and other reason. There are Ginning and pressing industries within the municipal limits of Raichur and also separate cotton market yard which require large quantity of cotton for their work and due to failure of cotton growing in large scale the industries & the market yard are under loss. Through-out India there are Agriculture University owned by the State Government as well as Government of India. The Respondent NO- 1 & 2 would have sold the Hybride cotton seeds produced by the Karnataka Agriculture University Dharwad or Bangalore Agriculture University Bangalore or Tamil Nadu Agriculture University Coimbuture or any other University instead of selling un-certified Bunny Hybride cotton seeds produced by Respondent No-3 which is illegal and against to agricultural occupation. Hence for all these reasons the complainant has sought for direction to Respondent No- 1 to 3 to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental loss Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony and distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total Rs. One Lakh to the complainant with interest at the rate of 25% along with cost of litigation. 2. In-response to service of notice Respondent NO- 1 & 2 appeared through Advocate and Respondent No-3 appeared through another Advocate and filed their separate written version. 3. Respondent NO-2 has filed written version adopted by Respondent NO-1. In the written-version Respondents 1 & 2 have denied that the complainant had invested Rs. 60,000/- in cash and 50 grams of gold for the development of his land and had obtained crop loan from Pragathi Grameena Bank of Matamari Branch for growing cash crop. It is denied that they had orally stated that they have good variety of Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintalls and that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. It is denied that Bunny Cotton Seeds sold by the Respondent No-2 to the complainant are defective and they are not good qualities and that Respondent No-2 falsely represented Bunny Cotton Seeds are good quality for the purpose of promoting sale and played an unfair trade practice on the complainant. It is also denied that Respondent No-3 has not given proper and necessary information regarding the duration of cotton crop, pest management, fertilizer showing etc., and whatever printed on the seeds pocket is vague and un-practicable. In-fact these Respondents have purchased the Bunny Cotton Seeds from Respondent NO-3 in bulk. In-turn they have sold the Bunny Cotton Seeds to the farmers through their different branches but there is no single complaint regarding defective seeds of Bunny Cotton from any branches. It is denied that Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S. Patil have over-looked the true facts and have given false & vague report illegally favouring the Respondents. But whatever the report given by the above said two persons are correct because due to improper pest management, and improper spray, and the complainant having not taken proper care the complainant did not get any yield. It is denied that the complainant has put to monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and put to mental agony and distress against which he sought compensation for Rs. 49,500/-. The complainant has not stated specifically as to how much yield he was getting from his land and how much he has incurred loss so he is not entitled to any compensation. In-fact after (5) months of the germination of the Bunny cotton plants in the land of the complainant he has not taken proper pest management, proper spray, etc., and also due to shortage of rain and good climate and for some other reasons the complainant might not have yield to his satisfaction for which these Respondents are in no way concerned and so they are not liable for any compensation. Hence for all these reasons Respondents 1 & 2 have sought for dismissal of the complaint with cost. 4. Respondent NO-3 has filed written version contending that he is the producer of Bunny cotton seeds and markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity and germination to National Seeds Corporation i.e, the Respondent No-1 and to other dealers. The Respondent NO-1 markets the seeds through various dealers. The seeds produced by these Respondent under goes various tests and are grown and produced under the care and supervision of experts. After ascertaining quality it will be marketed. Hence the question of producing defective and spurious seeds is totally impossible. Before marketing the seeds the Government authorities will test the seeds by taking samples in each lot. The contention of the complainant regarding advocacy & agriculture and investment of Rs. 60,000/- and dependency of the complainants family on agriculture is not in the knowledge of this Respondent. This Respondent does not know the approach of the complainant to Respondent NO-2 regarding the yield of cotton and regarding application of pesticide, hence the complainant is put to strict to proof of the allegation. The engagement of labourers, their wages and sowing of Hybride Bunny Seeds in his (2) acres of land is not within the knowledge of this Respondent. The sowing of BT Cotton seeds in the border row of the land is not recommended since there is a lot of difference in treatment and cultivation between Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and BT Cotton Seeds. The say of the complainant that Bunny Cotton Seeds did not burst/open well is in-correct. The cotton crop especially rain fed, needs proper moisture and friendly climate. The crop is liable to fail if there is less or more rain during the period. As admitted by the complainant that there was more than sufficient rain fall, that might also be a cause for less yield of cotton. The complainant is put to be strict proof regarding correct ploughing, pertaining the land for sowing and etc., If the proper mannuring is not followed, it also may be one of the cause for less yield. The purchase of fertilizers and pesticides and their application to the land is to be proved by the complainant. It is denied that the seeds were defective and of not good quality and that this Respondent has falsely represented regarding quality of seeds and have played unfair trade practice on the complainant. The question of this Respondent not furnishing proper and necessary information does not arise at all since the seed container contains necessary information, details of package practices also kept in the seed container for the benefit of the farmer and more over there was no occasion for the complainant to meet this Respondent earlier for purchase of the seeds. The officials named in the Report have visited the land and after examination of the land & crops have not given any opinion regarding seeds to be defective. But they have listed the reasons 1 to 4 as per their report dt 14-03-06 as under: a)The hirustum cotton was grown under rain fed conditions. b)The crop was uniform without any off types. c)Pest management was not satisfactory which was evident from the standing crop. Wherever timely and proper spraying was done the crop, looked good. At least half of the fined showed improper pest management. d)The crop was showing symptoms of moisture stress at the time of visit. The same is certified and signed by the concerned officials. Hence the say of the complainant that a false Report is given is in-correct. In this context it is also stated that there is no material placed by the complainant to ascertain the quality of the seeds as per section 13 (3) of C.P. Act. No residual seeds are produced before this Forum for ascertaining the quality of the seeds. More over, this Respondent has sold all the seeds with this Batch No. 5525118 in the market without any complaints by Raiths or agriculturists all over the country. The said Batch Number is old lot and no seeds are available now with the producers or in the market since they are time barred. Hence there is no other way to ascertain the quality of the seeds and the report of experts to be believed and accepted. Purtpli villagers and other surrounding village agriculturist have grown Bunny Cotton Seeds and have taken good yield. No complaint of any agriculturists from Raichur District and other places regarding poor quality of Bunny Seeds have come forth. The Bunny Cotton Seeds are used by neighbouring states also. No complaints are made against these seeds except the present complainant. The complainant has failed to understand the difference between Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and Genetically treated B.T. cotton seeds and this complaint is based on mis-understanding between the two seeds. The allegation that the complainant has incurred monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony etc., is baseless and liable to be rejected. Notice U/s. 80 CPC is properly replied by denying the contents therein. The claim for compensation of Rs. One Lakh is imaginary and without any material and substance so the same is liable to be rejected. This complaint is filed for harassing and squeezing the money from the Respondents under the guise of defective seeds and unfair trade practice. The vast quality of Bunny Seeds sold and sown have given good yield and more & more Raiths are growing Bunny Cotton. Some of the bills to this affect showing Bunny Seeds sold in the area are filled. No complaints by the users have come forth regarding defect in the seeds or less yield. The Raiths of Purtipli village and other surrounding villagers are pleased with their crops and have given a letter of appreciation dt. 19-06-07 in-respect of Bunny Cotton Seeds and crops which is produced in this case. This Respondent has also obtained average rainfall list which is evident that rainfall was not sufficient during the period of sowing and harvesting. The moisture stress as opined by the expert evidently is one amongst the reasons along with pest mis-management are the reasons for less yield. The complaint is silent regarding quantity of yield i.e, harvested by the complainant. This again shows that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. He has mis-convinced Bunny cotton seeds with Genetically BT Cotton seeds. Hence for all these reasons Respondent NO-3 has sought for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost. 5. During the course of enquiry the complainant who is in person has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as PW- and has filed (8) affidavit-evidence of Purtipli villagers namely:- Bheemanna, Sugappa Veereshappa, Narasappa, Laxmi Jagadisha, K.Sharanappa & Shivasharanappa as PWs-2 to PWs-9. In-rebuttal the Respondent No-2 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief for Respondent NO- 1 & 2 as RW-1 & Respondent No-3 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as RW.2. There-apart the complainant/PW-1 has been cross-examined by the Respondent NO-1 to 3. Similarly RW-1 & RW-2 have been cross-examined by the complainant. On behalf of the complainant (24) documents have been got marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-24. On behalf of Respondent NO- 1 & 2 (2) documents have been got marked as Ex.R-2 & Ex.R-3. On behalf of Respondent NO-3 (14) documents have been got marked at Ex.R-1 & Ex.R-4 to Ex.R-16. 6. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the records. The following points arise for our consideration and determination: 1.Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents in supplying/selling defective seeds (Bunny Cotton Seeds), as alleged.? 2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for? 7. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1)In the affirmative. 2) As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO. 1 :- 8. There is no dispute regarding purchase of two packets of Bunny Cotton Seeds by the complainant on 17-06-05 & 20-06-05 respectively from Respondent No-1 under cash memo at Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5. So also there is no dispute regarding complainant owning land Sy.No.78/2 at Purtipli village. There apart complainant has produced Record of Rights of his land Sy.No. 78/2 for the year 2006-07 at Ex.P-20 showing his name as owner and cultivator. It is the case of the complainant that he wanted to grow cash crop i.e, cotton crop in his land in-order to repay bank crop loan taken by him. Accordingly on 17-06-05 he approached Respondent No-2s office to purchase Hybride Cotton Seeds. On enquiry Respondent No-2 had orally stated that they have Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds which are of good variety as they grow big fruits and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintal in rain fed crop and 10-12 quintal in wet crop. He was also told that in the beginning upto one month no pesticides need to be sprayed to the crops and the price per pocket is Rs. 450/- after deducting discount and weight would be 40 grms was also told that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. Believing on Respondent No-2s oral statement the complainant purchased one packet on 17-06-05 and another on 20-06-05 under cash memo. 9. Respondent No- 1 & 2 in their written statement at Para-5 have denied allegation that Respondent No-2 has orally stated that Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds are good varieties and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintals and that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office etc., Respondent No-3 also in his written statement at Para-5 has stated that he does not know and it is not in his knowledge that the Respondent No-2 had orally told regarding yield of cotton and regarding application of pesticides. But the written statement of these Respondents do no whisper a single word about containing of container in the sealed packet of Bunny Cotton Seeds about instructions for use of cotton seeds by the farmers. However the Respondent No-3 in Para-2 of written version has contended that it is are producer of Bunny Cotton Seeds and markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity and germination to National Seeds Corporation i.e, Respondent No- 1 who in-turn markets the seeds through various dealers. Respondent No-3 in his affidavit-evidence at Para-3 has reiterated the same. 10. The Respondent No-3 in Para-8 of written version and in the affidavit-evidence has contended that the question of the Respondent No-3 not furnishing proper and necessary information does not arise at all, since the seed container contains the necessary information. Details of package practices also kept in the seed container for the benefit of the farmer. This Respondent NO-3 in the cross-examination of complainant-PW-1 has also confronted a pamphlet containing Kannada Language instructions about measures to be taken right from dibbling upto plucking of cotton and got marked the same as Ex.R-1. But the complainant PW-1 has withstood by voluntarily stating that the pamphlet like Ex.R-1 was not at all furnished to him or such a pamphlet was containing in the packet. The complainant has produced the two empty seeds packets at Ex.P-17(1) & Ex.P-17(2). On the right front portion of the packet we find English & Hindi printings as NCS-145(BUNNY) and on the left side coroner we find English printing as A RESEARCH COTTON HYBRID OF NUZIVEEDU SEEDS. Below this printings we find English printings like SUBEEJ and Amblem of the NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED Guntur and printing of Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd., Guntur. On back side of packet towards left side we find printings as SUBEEJ in English language and the printings as NCS-145(BUNNY) in four languages like Telugu & three other languages. Below this there is also printings as SUBEEJ in six languages including Hindi, Kannada & Telugu languages. On the right side in the top we find printings of the name of the company as NUZIEVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED in English, Telegu & Hindi. Below this printings we find English printing of Label No., Kind of crops, Variety, Lot No, Date, Month & year of test, Valid upto Germination (Min) % 75, Physical Purity (Min) % 98, Genetic Purity (Min)% 90, Net Weight 450 grams. It also shows English printings as RECOMMENDED FOR CULTIVATION IN PUNJAB, HARYANA, RAJASTHAN, GUJARATH, MADHYAPRADESH, MAHARASTRA, ANDHRAPRADESH, TAMILNADU, KARNATAKA & ORISSA IN KHARIFF SEASON. We also find printings of Label No. 222492 Lot No. 5525118 valid upto 13-01-06 manufactured on 20-04-05 MRP Rs. 477/-. Below this there is English printing in Red colour as: TREATED WITH POISON (IMIDACLOPRID 70% W.S. OR THIAMETHOXAM 70% W.S. OR CARBOXIN 75% WP) DO NOT USE FOR FOOD, FEED OR OIL PURPOSES. Below this we find the printings as Produced & Marketed by the NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED Registered Office: 905 Kanchipuram Building, Barakhamba Road, Cannought Place, New delhi-110 001. Corporate Office 7c, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad. We also find printing as: TO BE STORED IN A COOL & DRY PLACE, VALIDITY SUBJECT TO PROPER STORAGE CONDITIONS. FOLLOW CROP MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RECOMMENDED BY RESPECTIVE STATE AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY OR PUBLIC SECTOR RESEARCH STATIONS. A close perusal of printings on the packet it does not disclose containing of container of pamphlet like Ex.R-1 that too in Kannada Language. So it falsify the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the sealed packet contain pamphlet of instructions to the farmers. Therefore the pamphlet at Ex.R-1 is of no assistance to the Respondent No-3. 11. The L.C. for the Respondent NO-3 argued that the Respondent NO-3 the producer of Bunny Cotton Seeds, markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity, and germination to the National Seeds Corporation i.e, Respondent NO-1 and other dealers. This Respondent NO-1 in his turn markets the seeds through various dealers, the seeds were produced by Respondent NO-3 under goes various tests and are grown and produced under care and supervision of experts. After ascertaining the quality it will be marketed. Hence the question of producing defective and spurious seeds is totally impossible and that before marketing the seeds the Government Authorities will test the seeds by taking samples in each Lot. He further argued that on the complaint of the complainant to the Assistant Director of Agriculture Raichur, his land was visited by Expert Team consisting of Rajesh S. Patil Breeder (Cotton) M.Bhimanna Entomologist (Cotton) and after examination they have not given any opinion regarding seeds to be defective but they have listed the reasons such as pest management was not satisfactory and it showed improper management. In this regard the L.C. has relied on Examination Report at Ex.P-19 and the Self Certificate (Information Truthful Seed Production Programme) at Ex.R-11 and Production Certificate at Ex.R-12. He has also relied on original letter at Ex.R-5 issued by Agriculturist of Purtipli village dt. 19-06-07 certifying that they have taken good yield by sowing the Bunny Cotton Seeds in their respective lands for (4) years from 2003-06. On the contrary the complainant who is an Advocate argued that the signatory/villagers to this letter at Ex.R-5 have filed sworn-affidavit-evidence stating that the Respondent No-3 has taken their signatures forcibly on blank papers and no reliance could be attached to the said letter. He further argued that the Respondents have not produced the seeds test report by the Government Authorities as contended in Para-2 of written statement. The self certificate produced at Ex.R-11 has no evidenciary value. 12. Ex.P-18 is the letter/complaint of the complainant addressed to the Assistant Director of Agriculture Raichur. In this letter among other things the complainant has stated that he had sown Bunny Cotton Seeds manufactured and sold by the Respondents, in his land Sy.No. 78/2 of Purtipli village on 09-07-2005 even after lapse of (4) months (20) days the Bunny Cotton fruits did not burst well and requested for examination by the Authority. It appears that on this complaint a team consisting of Breeder (Cotton) & Entomologist (Cotton) visited the land and after examination they have issued their Report at Ex.P-19. This opinion Report being a short one reads as under:- REPORT ON COTTON FIELD VISIT We have visited the cotton field of Sri. Siddayya S/o. Padadayya of Purthipli village of Raichur district on the request of National Seeds Corporation, Raichur along with the corporations officials on 03-12-2005. The observations were as follows. 1.This hirsutum cotton was grow under rainfed conditions. 2.The crop was uniform without any off types. 3.Pest management was not satisfactory which was evident from the standing crop. Wherever timely and proper spraying was done the crop, looked good. At least half of the field showed improper pest management. 4.The crop was showing symptoms of moisture stress at the time of the visit. Sd/ Sd/- (M.Bheemanna) (Rajesh.S. Patil) Entomologist (Cotton) Breeder (Cotton) The complainant further submitted that he has filed his complaint on 28-11-05 and the Team visited his land on 03-02-04 but they have submitted their Report on 14-03-06 which is more than 3 ½ months after their visit and that they have over looked true facts and have given false and vague report favouring the Respondents. 13. Admittedly the Respondents have not produced the Seed Test certificate to show that before marketing, the seeds were tested by the Government Authorities by taking samples in each Lot as contended by the Respondent No-3 in Para 2 of written version. But however the Respondent NO-3 has produced Ex.R-11 & Ex.R-12 as stated above. Ex.R-11 is the Self Certificate (INFORMATION TRUTHFUL SEEDS PRODUCTION PROGRAMME). A perusal, it shows that Respondent NO-3 Corporation has given information regarding production of Bunny Cotton Seeds. It states in detail that the Respondent Corporation produced N.C.S. 145 Bunny Cotton Seeds by sowing process. A close perusal of Col.No-7 of this Ex.R-11 it shows that one Pujara Motibhai Bhurabai is the seed grower whose land is situated at Muloj village, Mandal- Modasa, District S.K. (Full Form is not shown) of Gujarath State. The quantity of parent seeds sown shows-Male: 0.06 and Female: 0.12 Grms. The area of the seeds sown in acres shown: 0.23 (Guntas). The quantity of seeds grown in Kgs shows: 48 Kgs. The Final total seeds after processing in Kg shows: 245.50. The weight of each packet is shown as: 450 Grms and number of packets is shown as: 543. The date of germination test shows as 14-04-05. Germination percentage as 78%. Number & date of field test result is shown as 31-03-05. Filed test result (genetic purity) is shown as 92.4% and lot No. as 5525118 etc., A Note below to this certificate states that: (1) Information given in form is filed with the original record and is found correct. (2) The Original record will be produced as and when required the true Xerox copy of the purchase of the parent seeds are short release report is enclosed. 14. So from this Ex.R-11 it is clear that they have manufactured/grown the Bunny Cotton Seeds (of Lot No. 5525118) in the land of Pujara Motibhai in Muloj village of Gujarath State by sowing the parent-seeds at ratio-Male: 0.06 and Female: 0.12 in an area of 0.23 (Guntas) and they got the yield of 48 Kgs as noted in Col. No. 8. According to this Ex.R-11, if by sowing parental seeds in an area of 23 guntas they got only 48 Kgs of Bunny Cotton Seeds, then the Final total quality after processing, showing 245.50 Kgs appears to be wrong. Because when the total production of seeds itself is 48 Kgs then how can there be more quantity of seeds after processing of grown-up seeds of 48 Kgs. For this doubt the Forum asked the counsel for Respondent No-3 for clarifying. The L.C. for Respondent No-3 filed a memo on 17-06-08 stating that the Sl.No. 8 in Ex.R-11 is typed as 48 Kgs but in fact due to Typographical mistake it should have been 248 Kgs and not 48 Kgs. The complainant who is an Advocate has endorsed his objection that there will be no typing mistake since it is a Xerox copy. As stated above in Ex.R-11 we find a Note stating that the Information given in the form is compared with original record and is found correct. This means the contents of Ex.R-11 are duly compared with the original record. Hence it follows that the original record shows the total production of seeds as 48 Kgs only. When this is so, then how can there be more quantity of seeds after processing of the grown seeds in the above said land. So the Col.No-9 showing the Final total quantity (after processing) as 245.50 Kg is wrong when the total quantity seeds produced itself is 48 Kg and after due processing its total quantity will be reduced and not it will be increased. So the final total quantity after processing showing as 245.50 Kg is undoubtedly wrong and there-by it creates a strong doubt that this 245.50 seeds distributed in 543 packets weighing 450 Grms each must be a mixture with 48 Kgs of original seeds produced under manufacturing process of seeds in 23 guntas of land of the grower. Except the above said memo stating that the Col.No.8 in Ex.R-11 showing production of seeds as 48 Kgs is a Typographical mistake, the Respondent No-3 has not substantiated by any material particulars. If this is so the Report of the Expert Team at Ex.P-19 is of no avail to the Respondents. 15. In a nut shell it follows that the Respondents especially Respondent NO-3 who has contended in Para-2 of the written statement that before marketing, the seeds will be tested & certified by the Government Authorities and the non-production of that certificate is fatal to the Respondents. Further-more Ex.R-11 Self Certificate (Information Truthful Seed Production Programme) produced by Respondent NO-3 itself showing that the seeds grown is only 48 Kgs, then 245.50 Kgs of seeds distributed in 543 packates of 450 Grms must be a mixture. This in-turn falsify the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the seeds in the packets purchased by the complainant are of good variety seeds. Thereby the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the complainant has not proved defective seeds by testifying the samples of Bunny Cotton Seeds as per section 13(3) of C.P. Act does not stand to reason. It would be more-so when the Respondent No-3 in Para-9 has stated that he has sold all the seeds in Lot No. 5525118 in the market & they are time barred and so there is no other-way to ascertain the quality of the seeds. Therefore for our foregoing reasons and discussions, we hold that the complainant has proved that the Respondent No.3 have supplied defective seeds and thereby there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents. Hence Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 16. The complainant has claimed Rs. 50,000/- towards monetary loss and Rs. 49,500/- towards mental agony & distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total he has claimed Rs. One Lakh with interest at 24% p.a. The complainant has produced two cash memo at Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5 regarding purchase of packets and purchase of fertilizers of pesticides vide Ex.P-6 to Ex.P-12. 17. Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5 cash memo regarding purchase of seeds shows payment of Rs. 450 per packet totaling to Rs. 900/-. The cash memo at Ex.P-6 to Ex.P-12 in respect of purchase of fertilizers & pesticides show payment of Rs. 1455.22 Ps under Ex.P-6, Rs. 250/- under Ex.P-7, Rs. 120 under Ex.P-8, Rs. 732/- under Ex.P-9, Rs. 240/- under Ex.P-10, Rs. 260 under Ex.P-11, and Rs. 400 under Ex.P-12. In Para-4 to Para-6 of complaint he has stated that he had employed 10 woman labours on payment of wages of Rs. 200/- for sowing the Bunny Cotton Seeds and spent Rs. 1,705/- for fertilizers and Rs. 295/- for hire & labour charges totaling to Rs. 2,000/- and that he has purchased pesticides and fertilizers in all worth Rs. 1,657/- and has paid Rs. 343/- for labour charges in between 12-08-05 to 25-08-05. In Para-9 of his complaint he has stated that during the relevant year of 2005-06 the farmers of Purtipli village had grown B.T. cotton of 10-12 quintals per acre in rain fed crop and sold at the rate of Rs. 2300/- per quintal and B.T. cotton seeds packets were sold at the rate of Rs. 600/- weighing 650 grms and that he could have grown 20-24 quintals of Hybride cotton in his 2 acres of his land if the seeds sold to him were of good quality. So he was put monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and also for mental agony distress for which he seeks compensation. For our elaborate discussion and finding on Point NO-1, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel it just and proper to award a global compensation of Rs. 75,000/- under all heads including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order. ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. The Respondents 1 to 3 jointly and severally shall pay the award sum of Rs. 75,000/- to the complainant within a period of (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 25-06-08) Sd/- On leave Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath Sri. Gururaj Sri. N.H. Savalagi, Member. Member. President, Dist.Forum-Raichur. Dist-Forum-Raichur Dist-Forum-Raichur.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM RAICHUR. COMPLAINT NO. DCFR. 32/07. THIS THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2008. P R E S E N T 1. Sri. N.H.Savalagi, B.A.LLB. (Spl) PRESIDENT. 2. Sri. Gururaj, B.com.LLB. (Spl) MEMBER. 3. Smt. Pratibha Rani Hiremath,M.A. (Sanskrit) MEMBER. ***** COMPLAINANT :- Mr. P. Siddayya S/o. Padadayya, Age: 59 years, Occ: Agriculture & Advocate, R/o. Purtipli 584 202, Raichur, Karnataka, India. //VERSUS// RESPONDENTS :- 1. The Secretary, National Seeds Corporation Ltd., (The Govt of India Undertaking) Beeja Bhavan Pusa Complex New Delhi- 110012 India. 2. Mr. Venkatesh, The Area Manager, N.S.C. Gunj Road, Raichur- 584 102 Karnataka. 3. The Secretary, Nujiveedu Seeds Ltd., 905 Kanch Jung Building, Bara Kamba Road, Cannought Place, New Delhi- 110 001, India. CLAIM :- For direction to Respondent No- 1 to 3 to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental loss Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony and distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total Rs. One Lakh to the complainant with interest at the rate of 25% along with cost of litigation. Date of institution :- 25-04-07. Notice served :- 07-06-07. Date of disposal :- 25-06-08. Complainant represented by In Person. Respondent No- 1 & 2 represented by Sri. T. Chandrashekhar, Advocate. Respondent No- 3 represented by Sri. G.R. Ashok, Advocate. ----- This case coming for final disposal before us, the Forum on considering the entire material and evidence placed on record by the parties passed the following. JUDGEMENT This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act by the complainant P.Siddayya against the Respondents- (1) Secretary National Seeds Corporation Ltd., Bheeja Bhavan Pusa Complex New Delhi (2) Venkatesh Area Manage N.S.C. Gunj, Road Raichur and (3) Secretary Nujiveedu Seeds Ltd., Bara Kamba, Road New Delhi. The facts leading rise to the complaint may be summed up as under:- The complainant is an agriculturist as well as Advocate by profession and he is the owner in possession of agriculture land bearing Sy.No. 78/2 measuring (4) acres (1) gunta situated within the limits of Purtipli village. It is light irrigated under Tungabhadra Project. But no water is supplied due to tailend area. So rained crops are grown in his land. The complainant has reduced his legal practice and his family members livelihood is mainly depending upon agricultural income only. He had invested Rs. 60,000/- in cash and Rs. 50 grms of gold for development of his lands. The agriculture work is operating on the bank loan facility and he is indebted to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- crop loan to the Prgathi Grameen Bank Matamari. The Respondent No-1 is a Seeds Corporation and is a Government of India undertaking. The Respondent No-2 is the Area Manager of Respondent No-1 and he is vendor of Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds to the complainant. Respondent NO-3 is a Company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 and is producer of said Bunny Seeds and vendor to Respondent No-1. The complainant wanted to grow cash crop i.e, cotton in his land to repay the bank crop loan amount. So on 17-06-05 he approached to the Respondent No-2 office to purchase Hybride cotton seeds. On enquiry Respondent No-2 had orally stated that they have Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and they are good variety as they grow big fruits and average yield per acre will be 5 to 6 quintals in rain fed the crop and 10-12 in wet crop. In the beginning upto one month no pesticides need to be sprayed to the crop and there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. The price per pocket is Rs. 450/- after deducting discount and weight would be 450 grms. Believing the Respondent-1s oral statement to be true he purchased one packet on 17-06-05 and another on 20-06-05 as per cash memo. On 09-07-05 the complainant by employing (10) women labours on payment wages of Rs. 200/- sown two packets Bunny Seeds in the two acres of his land towards northern side plot spacing 60 C.M. to 64 C.M. within a row and 100 C.M. to 110 C.M. between rows in the East-West lines and 25-30 BT Cotton seeds were also sown in the border-row towards South-West portion of his cotton field. About 22-25 seeds grown in BT cotton land and fruits well burst bolls. But Bunny cotton did not burst well. There was more than sufficient rainfall in the year 2005-06 to grow rain fed cotton crop. The complainant had spent Rs. 1,600/- for ploughing and Rs.1,400/- for removing gross. On 26-08-05 he had sown 100 kgs DAP, 50 Kgs Urea and 50 Kgs Potash. On 25-09-05 he had sown 50 Kgs Urea cotton crop. He had spent Rs.1,705/- for fertilizers and Rs. 295/- for hire and labour charges in total Rs. 2,000/-.On 12-08-05 & on 25-08-05 he has sprayed Endosulfan 35 E.C. to the cotton crop and with a gap of (15) days further he has sprayed insecticide to the cotton crop upto 10-02-06 i.e, maturity period of cotton crop. He had purchased 2½ liters Endo Sulpfan 35 EC, two liters Luphos 36, Mono Corotophus 36% SL, 250 grms Lucid 75 and Tata Aasataf 75 SP by (1) Kg, in all worth Rs. 1657 and Rs. 343/- for labouring charges. The seeds produced and sold by Respondent NO- 1 to 3 to the complainant are defective and are not of good quality. The Respondent No-2 has falsely represented that the Bunny cotton seeds are of good quality for the purpose of promoting the sale and played and un-fair trade practice on the complainant. Respondent NO-3 has not given proper and necessary information regarding the duration of the cotton crop, pest management fertilizers sowing etc., Whatever printed on the seeds packets is vague and un-practicable. Therefore Respondent No-1 & 2 being the dealers and Respondent No-3 being producer of the defective Bunny Hybride Seeds are jointly liable to pay compensate to the complainant. On 28-11-05 he gave an application to the Assistant Agriculture Officer, Raichur requesting to inspect his cotton field as the crop failed due to defective seeds. He referred the matter to the Respondent NO-2 who visited on 03-12-05 along with representative of the Respondent No-3 and two officials namely: (1) Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S. Patil of Regional Agriculture Research Station Raichur. The complainant showed them bare cotton plants having no fruits in them and some plants having fruits which did not burst well. The buds and flowers were grown on all cotton plants when the crop is of (5) months old. Two Photos of cotton seeds which were taken are enclosed. Each plant had 2-3 small and folded leaves which looked like deceased. The flowers did not bloom clearly. These are clear symptoms of defects in the seeds sold to him. Further the complainant took the Inspecting Persons to the adjacent land Sy.No. 77 wherein its owner had grown rain fed BT crop. The fruits were well burst cotton balls. After First picking there were 35 to 50 fruits in each plant other than the buds and flowers. Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S.Patil have over looked the above true facts and have given false and vague report illegally favouring the Respondents. The report is enclosed. During 2005-06 farmers in Purtpli village had grown BT cotton yielding 10-12 quintals per acre in rain fed crop and sold at the rate of of Rs. 2,300/- per quintal. BT cotton seeds pockets were sold in purtipli village at Rs. 600/- and were weighing 650 gms. The complainant could have grown 20-24 quintals of hybride cotton in 2 acres of his land if the seeds were sold by the Respondent No-2 were good quality. Whereas he had grown less than two quintals of hybride cotton in 2 acres of his land and thereby he was put to monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and also mental agony & distress for which he seeks a compensation of Rs. 49,500/-. The Raichur District is the only major cotton crop growing District in Karnataka State which has got fertile deep black soil for growing rainfed and wet cotton crops. There was a co-operative spinning mill within 3 kms from Raichur which was recently liquidated for want of cotton and other reason. There are Ginning and pressing industries within the municipal limits of Raichur and also separate cotton market yard which require large quantity of cotton for their work and due to failure of cotton growing in large scale the industries & the market yard are under loss. Through-out India there are Agriculture University owned by the State Government as well as Government of India. The Respondent NO- 1 & 2 would have sold the Hybride cotton seeds produced by the Karnataka Agriculture University Dharwad or Bangalore Agriculture University Bangalore or Tamil Nadu Agriculture University Coimbuture or any other University instead of selling un-certified Bunny Hybride cotton seeds produced by Respondent No-3 which is illegal and against to agricultural occupation. Hence for all these reasons the complainant has sought for direction to Respondent No- 1 to 3 to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards mental loss Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony and distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total Rs. One Lakh to the complainant with interest at the rate of 25% along with cost of litigation. 2. In-response to service of notice Respondent NO- 1 & 2 appeared through Advocate and Respondent No-3 appeared through another Advocate and filed their separate written version. 3. Respondent NO-2 has filed written version adopted by Respondent NO-1. In the written-version Respondents 1 & 2 have denied that the complainant had invested Rs. 60,000/- in cash and 50 grams of gold for the development of his land and had obtained crop loan from Pragathi Grameena Bank of Matamari Branch for growing cash crop. It is denied that they had orally stated that they have good variety of Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintalls and that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. It is denied that Bunny Cotton Seeds sold by the Respondent No-2 to the complainant are defective and they are not good qualities and that Respondent No-2 falsely represented Bunny Cotton Seeds are good quality for the purpose of promoting sale and played an unfair trade practice on the complainant. It is also denied that Respondent No-3 has not given proper and necessary information regarding the duration of cotton crop, pest management, fertilizer showing etc., and whatever printed on the seeds pocket is vague and un-practicable. In-fact these Respondents have purchased the Bunny Cotton Seeds from Respondent NO-3 in bulk. In-turn they have sold the Bunny Cotton Seeds to the farmers through their different branches but there is no single complaint regarding defective seeds of Bunny Cotton from any branches. It is denied that Mr. Bheemanna and Mr. Rajesh.S. Patil have over-looked the true facts and have given false & vague report illegally favouring the Respondents. But whatever the report given by the above said two persons are correct because due to improper pest management, and improper spray, and the complainant having not taken proper care the complainant did not get any yield. It is denied that the complainant has put to monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and put to mental agony and distress against which he sought compensation for Rs. 49,500/-. The complainant has not stated specifically as to how much yield he was getting from his land and how much he has incurred loss so he is not entitled to any compensation. In-fact after (5) months of the germination of the Bunny cotton plants in the land of the complainant he has not taken proper pest management, proper spray, etc., and also due to shortage of rain and good climate and for some other reasons the complainant might not have yield to his satisfaction for which these Respondents are in no way concerned and so they are not liable for any compensation. Hence for all these reasons Respondents 1 & 2 have sought for dismissal of the complaint with cost. 4. Respondent NO-3 has filed written version contending that he is the producer of Bunny cotton seeds and markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity and germination to National Seeds Corporation i.e, the Respondent No-1 and to other dealers. The Respondent NO-1 markets the seeds through various dealers. The seeds produced by these Respondent under goes various tests and are grown and produced under the care and supervision of experts. After ascertaining quality it will be marketed. Hence the question of producing defective and spurious seeds is totally impossible. Before marketing the seeds the Government authorities will test the seeds by taking samples in each lot. The contention of the complainant regarding advocacy & agriculture and investment of Rs. 60,000/- and dependency of the complainants family on agriculture is not in the knowledge of this Respondent. This Respondent does not know the approach of the complainant to Respondent NO-2 regarding the yield of cotton and regarding application of pesticide, hence the complainant is put to strict to proof of the allegation. The engagement of labourers, their wages and sowing of Hybride Bunny Seeds in his (2) acres of land is not within the knowledge of this Respondent. The sowing of BT Cotton seeds in the border row of the land is not recommended since there is a lot of difference in treatment and cultivation between Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and BT Cotton Seeds. The say of the complainant that Bunny Cotton Seeds did not burst/open well is in-correct. The cotton crop especially rain fed, needs proper moisture and friendly climate. The crop is liable to fail if there is less or more rain during the period. As admitted by the complainant that there was more than sufficient rain fall, that might also be a cause for less yield of cotton. The complainant is put to be strict proof regarding correct ploughing, pertaining the land for sowing and etc., If the proper mannuring is not followed, it also may be one of the cause for less yield. The purchase of fertilizers and pesticides and their application to the land is to be proved by the complainant. It is denied that the seeds were defective and of not good quality and that this Respondent has falsely represented regarding quality of seeds and have played unfair trade practice on the complainant. The question of this Respondent not furnishing proper and necessary information does not arise at all since the seed container contains necessary information, details of package practices also kept in the seed container for the benefit of the farmer and more over there was no occasion for the complainant to meet this Respondent earlier for purchase of the seeds. The officials named in the Report have visited the land and after examination of the land & crops have not given any opinion regarding seeds to be defective. But they have listed the reasons 1 to 4 as per their report dt 14-03-06 as under: a)The hirustum cotton was grown under rain fed conditions. b)The crop was uniform without any off types. c)Pest management was not satisfactory which was evident from the standing crop. Wherever timely and proper spraying was done the crop, looked good. At least half of the fined showed improper pest management. d)The crop was showing symptoms of moisture stress at the time of visit. The same is certified and signed by the concerned officials. Hence the say of the complainant that a false Report is given is in-correct. In this context it is also stated that there is no material placed by the complainant to ascertain the quality of the seeds as per section 13 (3) of C.P. Act. No residual seeds are produced before this Forum for ascertaining the quality of the seeds. More over, this Respondent has sold all the seeds with this Batch No. 5525118 in the market without any complaints by Raiths or agriculturists all over the country. The said Batch Number is old lot and no seeds are available now with the producers or in the market since they are time barred. Hence there is no other way to ascertain the quality of the seeds and the report of experts to be believed and accepted. Purtpli villagers and other surrounding village agriculturist have grown Bunny Cotton Seeds and have taken good yield. No complaint of any agriculturists from Raichur District and other places regarding poor quality of Bunny Seeds have come forth. The Bunny Cotton Seeds are used by neighbouring states also. No complaints are made against these seeds except the present complainant. The complainant has failed to understand the difference between Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds and Genetically treated B.T. cotton seeds and this complaint is based on mis-understanding between the two seeds. The allegation that the complainant has incurred monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs.49,500/- towards mental agony etc., is baseless and liable to be rejected. Notice U/s. 80 CPC is properly replied by denying the contents therein. The claim for compensation of Rs. One Lakh is imaginary and without any material and substance so the same is liable to be rejected. This complaint is filed for harassing and squeezing the money from the Respondents under the guise of defective seeds and unfair trade practice. The vast quality of Bunny Seeds sold and sown have given good yield and more & more Raiths are growing Bunny Cotton. Some of the bills to this affect showing Bunny Seeds sold in the area are filled. No complaints by the users have come forth regarding defect in the seeds or less yield. The Raiths of Purtipli village and other surrounding villagers are pleased with their crops and have given a letter of appreciation dt. 19-06-07 in-respect of Bunny Cotton Seeds and crops which is produced in this case. This Respondent has also obtained average rainfall list which is evident that rainfall was not sufficient during the period of sowing and harvesting. The moisture stress as opined by the expert evidently is one amongst the reasons along with pest mis-management are the reasons for less yield. The complaint is silent regarding quantity of yield i.e, harvested by the complainant. This again shows that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. He has mis-convinced Bunny cotton seeds with Genetically BT Cotton seeds. Hence for all these reasons Respondent NO-3 has sought for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost. 5. During the course of enquiry the complainant who is in person has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as PW- and has filed (8) affidavit-evidence of Purtipli villagers namely:- Bheemanna, Sugappa Veereshappa, Narasappa, Laxmi Jagadisha, K.Sharanappa & Shivasharanappa as PWs-2 to PWs-9. In-rebuttal the Respondent No-2 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief for Respondent NO- 1 & 2 as RW-1 & Respondent No-3 has filed his sworn-affidavit by way of examination-in-chief as RW.2. There-apart the complainant/PW-1 has been cross-examined by the Respondent NO-1 to 3. Similarly RW-1 & RW-2 have been cross-examined by the complainant. On behalf of the complainant (24) documents have been got marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-24. On behalf of Respondent NO- 1 & 2 (2) documents have been got marked as Ex.R-2 & Ex.R-3. On behalf of Respondent NO-3 (14) documents have been got marked at Ex.R-1 & Ex.R-4 to Ex.R-16. 6. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the records. The following points arise for our consideration and determination: 1.Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents in supplying/selling defective seeds (Bunny Cotton Seeds), as alleged.? 2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for? 7. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1)In the affirmative. 2) As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO. 1 :- 8. There is no dispute regarding purchase of two packets of Bunny Cotton Seeds by the complainant on 17-06-05 & 20-06-05 respectively from Respondent No-1 under cash memo at Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5. So also there is no dispute regarding complainant owning land Sy.No.78/2 at Purtipli village. There apart complainant has produced Record of Rights of his land Sy.No. 78/2 for the year 2006-07 at Ex.P-20 showing his name as owner and cultivator. It is the case of the complainant that he wanted to grow cash crop i.e, cotton crop in his land in-order to repay bank crop loan taken by him. Accordingly on 17-06-05 he approached Respondent No-2s office to purchase Hybride Cotton Seeds. On enquiry Respondent No-2 had orally stated that they have Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds which are of good variety as they grow big fruits and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintal in rain fed crop and 10-12 quintal in wet crop. He was also told that in the beginning upto one month no pesticides need to be sprayed to the crops and the price per pocket is Rs. 450/- after deducting discount and weight would be 40 grms was also told that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office. Believing on Respondent No-2s oral statement the complainant purchased one packet on 17-06-05 and another on 20-06-05 under cash memo. 9. Respondent No- 1 & 2 in their written statement at Para-5 have denied allegation that Respondent No-2 has orally stated that Hybride Bunny Cotton Seeds are good varieties and average yield per acre will be 5-6 quintals and that there are no other variety of cotton seeds in their office etc., Respondent No-3 also in his written statement at Para-5 has stated that he does not know and it is not in his knowledge that the Respondent No-2 had orally told regarding yield of cotton and regarding application of pesticides. But the written statement of these Respondents do no whisper a single word about containing of container in the sealed packet of Bunny Cotton Seeds about instructions for use of cotton seeds by the farmers. However the Respondent No-3 in Para-2 of written version has contended that it is are producer of Bunny Cotton Seeds and markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity and germination to National Seeds Corporation i.e, Respondent No- 1 who in-turn markets the seeds through various dealers. Respondent No-3 in his affidavit-evidence at Para-3 has reiterated the same. 10. The Respondent No-3 in Para-8 of written version and in the affidavit-evidence has contended that the question of the Respondent No-3 not furnishing proper and necessary information does not arise at all, since the seed container contains the necessary information. Details of package practices also kept in the seed container for the benefit of the farmer. This Respondent NO-3 in the cross-examination of complainant-PW-1 has also confronted a pamphlet containing Kannada Language instructions about measures to be taken right from dibbling upto plucking of cotton and got marked the same as Ex.R-1. But the complainant PW-1 has withstood by voluntarily stating that the pamphlet like Ex.R-1 was not at all furnished to him or such a pamphlet was containing in the packet. The complainant has produced the two empty seeds packets at Ex.P-17(1) & Ex.P-17(2). On the right front portion of the packet we find English & Hindi printings as NCS-145(BUNNY) and on the left side coroner we find English printing as A RESEARCH COTTON HYBRID OF NUZIVEEDU SEEDS. Below this printings we find English printings like SUBEEJ and Amblem of the NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED Guntur and printing of Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd., Guntur. On back side of packet towards left side we find printings as SUBEEJ in English language and the printings as NCS-145(BUNNY) in four languages like Telugu & three other languages. Below this there is also printings as SUBEEJ in six languages including Hindi, Kannada & Telugu languages. On the right side in the top we find printings of the name of the company as NUZIEVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED in English, Telegu & Hindi. Below this printings we find English printing of Label No., Kind of crops, Variety, Lot No, Date, Month & year of test, Valid upto Germination (Min) % 75, Physical Purity (Min) % 98, Genetic Purity (Min)% 90, Net Weight 450 grams. It also shows English printings as RECOMMENDED FOR CULTIVATION IN PUNJAB, HARYANA, RAJASTHAN, GUJARATH, MADHYAPRADESH, MAHARASTRA, ANDHRAPRADESH, TAMILNADU, KARNATAKA & ORISSA IN KHARIFF SEASON. We also find printings of Label No. 222492 Lot No. 5525118 valid upto 13-01-06 manufactured on 20-04-05 MRP Rs. 477/-. Below this there is English printing in Red colour as: TREATED WITH POISON (IMIDACLOPRID 70% W.S. OR THIAMETHOXAM 70% W.S. OR CARBOXIN 75% WP) DO NOT USE FOR FOOD, FEED OR OIL PURPOSES. Below this we find the printings as Produced & Marketed by the NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LIMITED Registered Office: 905 Kanchipuram Building, Barakhamba Road, Cannought Place, New delhi-110 001. Corporate Office 7c, Surya Towers, S.P. Road, Secunderabad. We also find printing as: TO BE STORED IN A COOL & DRY PLACE, VALIDITY SUBJECT TO PROPER STORAGE CONDITIONS. FOLLOW CROP MANAGEMENT PRACTICES RECOMMENDED BY RESPECTIVE STATE AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY OR PUBLIC SECTOR RESEARCH STATIONS. A close perusal of printings on the packet it does not disclose containing of container of pamphlet like Ex.R-1 that too in Kannada Language. So it falsify the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the sealed packet contain pamphlet of instructions to the farmers. Therefore the pamphlet at Ex.R-1 is of no assistance to the Respondent No-3. 11. The L.C. for the Respondent NO-3 argued that the Respondent NO-3 the producer of Bunny Cotton Seeds, markets the seeds in sealed packets with Lot numbers, weighment, price, purity, and germination to the National Seeds Corporation i.e, Respondent NO-1 and other dealers. This Respondent NO-1 in his turn markets the seeds through various dealers, the seeds were produced by Respondent NO-3 under goes various tests and are grown and produced under care and supervision of experts. After ascertaining the quality it will be marketed. Hence the question of producing defective and spurious seeds is totally impossible and that before marketing the seeds the Government Authorities will test the seeds by taking samples in each Lot. He further argued that on the complaint of the complainant to the Assistant Director of Agriculture Raichur, his land was visited by Expert Team consisting of Rajesh S. Patil Breeder (Cotton) M.Bhimanna Entomologist (Cotton) and after examination they have not given any opinion regarding seeds to be defective but they have listed the reasons such as pest management was not satisfactory and it showed improper management. In this regard the L.C. has relied on Examination Report at Ex.P-19 and the Self Certificate (Information Truthful Seed Production Programme) at Ex.R-11 and Production Certificate at Ex.R-12. He has also relied on original letter at Ex.R-5 issued by Agriculturist of Purtipli village dt. 19-06-07 certifying that they have taken good yield by sowing the Bunny Cotton Seeds in their respective lands for (4) years from 2003-06. On the contrary the complainant who is an Advocate argued that the signatory/villagers to this letter at Ex.R-5 have filed sworn-affidavit-evidence stating that the Respondent No-3 has taken their signatures forcibly on blank papers and no reliance could be attached to the said letter. He further argued that the Respondents have not produced the seeds test report by the Government Authorities as contended in Para-2 of written statement. The self certificate produced at Ex.R-11 has no evidenciary value. 12. Ex.P-18 is the letter/complaint of the complainant addressed to the Assistant Director of Agriculture Raichur. In this letter among other things the complainant has stated that he had sown Bunny Cotton Seeds manufactured and sold by the Respondents, in his land Sy.No. 78/2 of Purtipli village on 09-07-2005 even after lapse of (4) months (20) days the Bunny Cotton fruits did not burst well and requested for examination by the Authority. It appears that on this complaint a team consisting of Breeder (Cotton) & Entomologist (Cotton) visited the land and after examination they have issued their Report at Ex.P-19. This opinion Report being a short one reads as under:- REPORT ON COTTON FIELD VISIT We have visited the cotton field of Sri. Siddayya S/o. Padadayya of Purthipli village of Raichur district on the request of National Seeds Corporation, Raichur along with the corporations officials on 03-12-2005. The observations were as follows. 1.This hirsutum cotton was grow under rainfed conditions. 2.The crop was uniform without any off types. 3.Pest management was not satisfactory which was evident from the standing crop. Wherever timely and proper spraying was done the crop, looked good. At least half of the field showed improper pest management. 4.The crop was showing symptoms of moisture stress at the time of the visit. Sd/ Sd/- (M.Bheemanna) (Rajesh.S. Patil) Entomologist (Cotton) Breeder (Cotton) The complainant further submitted that he has filed his complaint on 28-11-05 and the Team visited his land on 03-02-04 but they have submitted their Report on 14-03-06 which is more than 3 ½ months after their visit and that they have over looked true facts and have given false and vague report favouring the Respondents. 13. Admittedly the Respondents have not produced the Seed Test certificate to show that before marketing, the seeds were tested by the Government Authorities by taking samples in each Lot as contended by the Respondent No-3 in Para 2 of written version. But however the Respondent NO-3 has produced Ex.R-11 & Ex.R-12 as stated above. Ex.R-11 is the Self Certificate (INFORMATION TRUTHFUL SEEDS PRODUCTION PROGRAMME). A perusal, it shows that Respondent NO-3 Corporation has given information regarding production of Bunny Cotton Seeds. It states in detail that the Respondent Corporation produced N.C.S. 145 Bunny Cotton Seeds by sowing process. A close perusal of Col.No-7 of this Ex.R-11 it shows that one Pujara Motibhai Bhurabai is the seed grower whose land is situated at Muloj village, Mandal- Modasa, District S.K. (Full Form is not shown) of Gujarath State. The quantity of parent seeds sown shows-Male: 0.06 and Female: 0.12 Grms. The area of the seeds sown in acres shown: 0.23 (Guntas). The quantity of seeds grown in Kgs shows: 48 Kgs. The Final total seeds after processing in Kg shows: 245.50. The weight of each packet is shown as: 450 Grms and number of packets is shown as: 543. The date of germination test shows as 14-04-05. Germination percentage as 78%. Number & date of field test result is shown as 31-03-05. Filed test result (genetic purity) is shown as 92.4% and lot No. as 5525118 etc., A Note below to this certificate states that: (1) Information given in form is filed with the original record and is found correct. (2) The Original record will be produced as and when required the true Xerox copy of the purchase of the parent seeds are short release report is enclosed. 14. So from this Ex.R-11 it is clear that they have manufactured/grown the Bunny Cotton Seeds (of Lot No. 5525118) in the land of Pujara Motibhai in Muloj village of Gujarath State by sowing the parent-seeds at ratio-Male: 0.06 and Female: 0.12 in an area of 0.23 (Guntas) and they got the yield of 48 Kgs as noted in Col. No. 8. According to this Ex.R-11, if by sowing parental seeds in an area of 23 guntas they got only 48 Kgs of Bunny Cotton Seeds, then the Final total quality after processing, showing 245.50 Kgs appears to be wrong. Because when the total production of seeds itself is 48 Kgs then how can there be more quantity of seeds after processing of grown-up seeds of 48 Kgs. For this doubt the Forum asked the counsel for Respondent No-3 for clarifying. The L.C. for Respondent No-3 filed a memo on 17-06-08 stating that the Sl.No. 8 in Ex.R-11 is typed as 48 Kgs but in fact due to Typographical mistake it should have been 248 Kgs and not 48 Kgs. The complainant who is an Advocate has endorsed his objection that there will be no typing mistake since it is a Xerox copy. As stated above in Ex.R-11 we find a Note stating that the Information given in the form is compared with original record and is found correct. This means the contents of Ex.R-11 are duly compared with the original record. Hence it follows that the original record shows the total production of seeds as 48 Kgs only. When this is so, then how can there be more quantity of seeds after processing of the grown seeds in the above said land. So the Col.No-9 showing the Final total quantity (after processing) as 245.50 Kg is wrong when the total quantity seeds produced itself is 48 Kg and after due processing its total quantity will be reduced and not it will be increased. So the final total quantity after processing showing as 245.50 Kg is undoubtedly wrong and there-by it creates a strong doubt that this 245.50 seeds distributed in 543 packets weighing 450 Grms each must be a mixture with 48 Kgs of original seeds produced under manufacturing process of seeds in 23 guntas of land of the grower. Except the above said memo stating that the Col.No.8 in Ex.R-11 showing production of seeds as 48 Kgs is a Typographical mistake, the Respondent No-3 has not substantiated by any material particulars. If this is so the Report of the Expert Team at Ex.P-19 is of no avail to the Respondents. 15. In a nut shell it follows that the Respondents especially Respondent NO-3 who has contended in Para-2 of the written statement that before marketing, the seeds will be tested & certified by the Government Authorities and the non-production of that certificate is fatal to the Respondents. Further-more Ex.R-11 Self Certificate (Information Truthful Seed Production Programme) produced by Respondent NO-3 itself showing that the seeds grown is only 48 Kgs, then 245.50 Kgs of seeds distributed in 543 packates of 450 Grms must be a mixture. This in-turn falsify the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the seeds in the packets purchased by the complainant are of good variety seeds. Thereby the contention of the Respondent No-3 that the complainant has not proved defective seeds by testifying the samples of Bunny Cotton Seeds as per section 13(3) of C.P. Act does not stand to reason. It would be more-so when the Respondent No-3 in Para-9 has stated that he has sold all the seeds in Lot No. 5525118 in the market & they are time barred and so there is no other-way to ascertain the quality of the seeds. Therefore for our foregoing reasons and discussions, we hold that the complainant has proved that the Respondent No.3 have supplied defective seeds and thereby there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Respondents. Hence Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 16. The complainant has claimed Rs. 50,000/- towards monetary loss and Rs. 49,500/- towards mental agony & distress and Rs. 500/- towards notice charges in total he has claimed Rs. One Lakh with interest at 24% p.a. The complainant has produced two cash memo at Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5 regarding purchase of packets and purchase of fertilizers of pesticides vide Ex.P-6 to Ex.P-12. 17. Ex.P-4 & Ex.P-5 cash memo regarding purchase of seeds shows payment of Rs. 450 per packet totaling to Rs. 900/-. The cash memo at Ex.P-6 to Ex.P-12 in respect of purchase of fertilizers & pesticides show payment of Rs. 1455.22 Ps under Ex.P-6, Rs. 250/- under Ex.P-7, Rs. 120 under Ex.P-8, Rs. 732/- under Ex.P-9, Rs. 240/- under Ex.P-10, Rs. 260 under Ex.P-11, and Rs. 400 under Ex.P-12. In Para-4 to Para-6 of complaint he has stated that he had employed 10 woman labours on payment of wages of Rs. 200/- for sowing the Bunny Cotton Seeds and spent Rs. 1,705/- for fertilizers and Rs. 295/- for hire & labour charges totaling to Rs. 2,000/- and that he has purchased pesticides and fertilizers in all worth Rs. 1,657/- and has paid Rs. 343/- for labour charges in between 12-08-05 to 25-08-05. In Para-9 of his complaint he has stated that during the relevant year of 2005-06 the farmers of Purtipli village had grown B.T. cotton of 10-12 quintals per acre in rain fed crop and sold at the rate of Rs. 2300/- per quintal and B.T. cotton seeds packets were sold at the rate of Rs. 600/- weighing 650 grms and that he could have grown 20-24 quintals of Hybride cotton in his 2 acres of his land if the seeds sold to him were of good quality. So he was put monetary loss of Rs. 50,000/- and also for mental agony distress for which he seeks compensation. For our elaborate discussion and finding on Point NO-1, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel it just and proper to award a global compensation of Rs. 75,000/- under all heads including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order. ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. The Respondents 1 to 3 jointly and severally shall pay the award sum of Rs. 75,000/- to the complainant within a period of (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 25-06-08) Sd/- On leave Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath Sri. Gururaj Sri. N.H. Savalagi, Member. Member. President, Dist.Forum-Raichur. Dist-Forum-Raichur Dist-Forum-Raichur.