BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : WARANGALPresent: Sri N.J. Mohan Rao, I/c. President, AND Smt. V.J. Praveena, Member. Monday the 31st March, 2008. CONSUMER DISPUTE NO. 20/2004 Between: Enupothula Mogili, S/o.Bondaiah, Age: 42 yrs., Occu.:Agriculture, R/o.Kuntapally Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. … Complainant AND The State of A.P. by the District Collector, Warnagal. 2. The Andhra Pradesh Seeds Corporation Ltd., Warnagal, rep.by its Authorised Signatory. 3. The Andhra Pradesh Seeds Corporation Ltd., rep. by its Regional Manager, R/o.5-10-193, Haka Bhavan, Hyderabad. 4. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Warangal. … Opposite Parties Counsel for the Complainant : Sri. N.Sekhar Rao, Advocate. Counsel for the Opposite Parties 1 & 4 : Government Pleader Counsel for the Opposite Parties2 & 3 : Sri Y.Sree Raghava Rao, Advocate This complaint coming for final hearing before this Forum, the Forum pronounced the following Order. -- ORDER -- Sri N.J.Mohan Rao, I/c.President This is a complaint filed by the complainant E. Mogili against the Opposite Parties U/Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to pay Rs.4,63,000/- towards the compensation for crop loss and Rs.10,000/- towards damages. The brief averments contained in the complaint filed by the complainant are as follows:- The complainant is a resident of Kuntapally Village of Warangal District and he owns an extent of Ac.12-00 guntas of land. The complainant purchased eight bags of Red gram crop at Rs.35/- each Kg. On 18-07-2003 from Opposite Party No.3. He assured by Opposite Parties that the yield would be more than 12 quintals per acre. The complainant during the third week of July, 2003 sowed the seeds purchased by him in an extent of Ac.12-00 guntas of land and took necessary precautionary measures, like providing sufficient water, applying fertilizers and pesticides. The growth of crop cultivated by the complainant was raised with better height and fat and expected more produce of Red Grame. But there was nothing produce. The complainant reported the matter to the Opposite Party No.1 and requested to inspect the crop but neither he inspected the crop nor made recommendation to Oppoiste Party No.2. the complainant approached the Field Inspector of crop. The Officers inspected te Red Grame of the complainant in his absence in the month of January, 2004 and opined that there will be only 1 to 5% of crop and remaining is waste and there is no growth due to defect in manufacturing of the seed by Opposite Parties but no issued any letter or certificate to that effect. As such the complainant filed the present complaint for redressal of his grievance. Opposite Party No.4 filed the Written Version contending in brief as follows: 2) On receiving the application of the complainant the Agricultural Officer, Sangem visited the field of the complainant with the help of Village Secretary and inspected the field and opined that the crop was at flowering and pod formation stage and severely infested with Helic overpa, Armigera and the complainant was not there on that day and given protection measures to be taken to the neighbouring farms for onward transmission to the complainant. On 13-01-2004 again the Agricultural Officer visited to know the crop condition of the complainant. On that day also he was not available. As such the Agricultural officer was unable to ascertain whether he has adopted any control measures which he has suggested earlier. The Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency of service and the complaint filed by the complainant may be dismissed. Opposite party No.1 filed a memo adopting the Written Version of Opposite Party No.4. Opposite Parties 2 & 3 filed the Written Version contending in brief as follows:- It is true that the complainant purchased 32 Kgs. Of ICPL variety of Red gram. The complainant never approached the opposite parties and represented about the failure of crop. The yield of the crop would depend upon various factors including proper crop management, climatic conditions and application of fertilizers and pesticides. The Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency of service and the complaint filed by the complainant may be dismissed. The complainant in support of his claim for compensation field his Affidavit and other 2 Affidavits i.e., adjacent farmers in the form of chief examination and also marked Exs.A-1 to A-14. On behalf of Opposite Parties 1 & 4 M.Laxmana Rao and on behalf of opposite parties 2 & 3 M.Laxman Singh filed their Affidavits in the form of chief examination and on their behalf Exs.B-1 to B-6 are marked. The Advocate Commissioner submitted the report, which is marked as Ex.C-1. The points that arise for consideration are: 1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties ? 2. To what relief ? Affidavit filed by the complainant stating that, he is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring about Ac.12-00 of land out of the Survey Numbers mentioned in the complaint situated at Kuntapally Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. He also states that to raise Red Gram Seed in his land he purchased eight (8) bags of Red Gram Seed of ICPL-87119 FIS, weighing 32 Kgs. @ Rs.35/- per Kg. Vide bill/lot No.102919, dated 18-07-2003 from Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 i.e. A.P.Seeds Corporation. He alleged that at the time of purchasing the said seeds, the Opposite Parties assured that the yield would be at least 12 quintals per acre. In the third week of July, 2003 he sowed the seed under the supervision of the Opposite Party No.2 in the above said land to an extent of Ac.12.00. He also stated that he provided the fertilizer, water and pesticides as per the requirement and the advise of the Agricultural Officer. The growth of the plants was good with height and fat more than the ordinary seeds. Though the growth of the plants is good there was no yield in the crop till January, 2004 and there was even no flowering on the plants. He further stated that he requested the Opposite Parties 2 & 4 to come over to his land and inspect the same and give report, but the Opposite Parties did not give any report and he came to know that in January, 2004 the officials of Opposite Party No.4 in his absence inspected his land and opined that the yield was 5% only, but they did not give any certificate in this regard. He also alleged that due to supply of the defective seeds by the Opposite Party No.2 he got huge loss which amounts to Rs.2,88,000/- and the costs of pesticides, fertilizers and labour around Rs.20,000/- and also incurred labour charges for about Rs.80,000/- right from sowing the seed till the removal of unyielded crop from the said land. He also stated that he sustained a total loss of Rs.4,63,000/-, the documents and Commissioner Report filed by him were marked. Affidavit filed by one Mr.Veera Swamy as PW-2 who is a neighbour of the said complainant land. In his Affidavit he certified the contention of PW-1 i.e. complainant’s contention. Affidavit also filed by one Mr.Y.Ramesh as PW-3, he also filed his Affidavit same as to PW.2. Exhibits filed on behalf of complainant. Ex.A-1 is the Xerox copy of the Pattedar pass book. Ex.A-2 is the Original Pahani for the year 2003-2004. Ex.A-3 is the Original Bill issued by Opposite Party No.2. Ex.A-4 is the Xerox copy of Agriculture Officer Letter. Ex.A-5,6,7 & 8 are Original Photographs and Negatives. Ex.A-9 is the Xerox copy of Consumers Council, Warangal Fax Message. Pesticides & Seeds, dated 18-08-2003. Ex.A-11 is the Original Receipt of Swathi Pesticides & Seeds, dated 11-11-2003. dated 15-11-2003. dated 29-11-2003. Pesticides & Seeds, dated 24-12-2003. Ex.A-15 is the Original Receipt of Arunal Fertilizers Depot, Pesticides & Seeds, dated 12-12-2003. On behalf of Opposite Parties 2 & 3, Sri Mr.Ch.Seetharamulu, Panchayath Secretary of the Grampanchayath, Kuntapally filed his Affidavit and stated that the Agriculture Officer of Sangem Mandal and himself visited the said agricultural field of the complainant on 02-01-2004 and he enquired about whereabouts of complainant, the adjacent farmers informed that he is residing in another district in view of his employment and he used to visit the field now and then. The said agricultural officer after inspecting the field of complainant found that the said Red-gram crop was affected with Pod Borer and Pests and he prepared a note regarding the preventive and precautionary steps for controlling the Pod Borer and Pests as per the schedule and the said note handed over to the adjacent farmers to give it to the said complainant. On 13-01-2004 along with the said Agricultural Officer again visited the field and given a note to control the Pests and Pod Borer. He also stated that he enquired the adjacent farmers and the neighbours, they told that the complainant is not residing in this village and he used to visit now and then. Affidavit also filed by one Mr. M.Laxman Rao as DW-3 and OP-4 on behalf of Opposite Parties 1 & 4. Mr. M.Laxman Rao is Joint Director of Agriculture, Warangal District and he stated in his Affidavit that the complainant given an application to the Mandal Agriculture Officer visited the field of the complainant with the help of Village Secretary, but on both the days the complainant was absent. The said Agriculture Officer noticed that the said crop was infested with Pod Borer (Helicoverpa armigera) and in the absence of the said complainant, the Agriculture Officer given some instructions to prevent and to take precautionary measures to the neighbour farmers and to inform to the said complainant. He also stated that there is every possibility in getting low yield if the crop is not protected from the Pod Borer attack. Hence the allegations were made against the Opposite Parties are false and irregular which will not sustain in eye of law. Exhibits B-1 to B-6 filed on behalf of Opposite Parties. Ex.B-1 is the Original copy of letter dated 02-01-2004. Ex.B-2 is the Xerox copy of Lr.No.D/178/1/2003, dt.:19-1-2004 of I/c.Asst.Director Agriculture, Dist.Warnagal. Ex.B-3 is the Lr.No.A.O/Misc./03, dt.:02-01-04 of Agricultural Officer, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-4 is the Lr.No.A.O.Misc/03 dt.:13-01-2004 of Agricultural officer, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-5 is the Xerox copy of Statement, dated 02-01-2004 to Ch.Seetharamulu, Panchayathi Karyadarshi, Kuntapelly Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-6 is the Xerox copy of Statement, dated 13-01-2004 to Ch.Seetharamulu, Panchayathi Karyadarshi, Kuntapelly Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. On the request of the counsel of the complainant the Forum appointed an Advocate Commissioner. The said Commissioner visited the fields of the complainant on 20-03-2004 he gave a report and stated that he visited the fields of the petitioner along with the parties and V.A.O. and examined the standing crop. He also stated that there was low yield in the said field and the yield of the crop is not uniform. He also observed that the plantation is infested with Pod Borer. No plantation is found over the neighbouring fields. He further stated that in the said report he has taken still photographs of the fields and he picked up samples at random from the fields in the presence of the parties. He filed the said photographs along with his report. Objections to the Commissioner’S Report filed on behalf of Opposite Parties 2 & 3. In that the Opposite Parties contended that the contentions mentioned in the Commissioner Report are false. Opposite Parties also stated that the Commissioner did not note down, not observed that the yield of the crop was affected only due to Pod Borer but not of genetically impurity of the seed and the Commissioner has failed to observe the crop damaged due to pest infection. The Commissioner also not enquired and not observed that the sowing of the said seeds and whether proper manuring and water supplied to the said field or not. Written Arguments also filed by Opposite Parties 2 & 3 In their Written Arguments the Opposite parties contended that the complainant at any point of time did not inform to the Opposite Parties regarding low yield. In fact the complainant in his complaint admitted that the plants of the crop was raised with better height and fat, which the complainant satisfied. The Advocate Commissioner also identified that the crop was affected with Pod Borer but the complainant is very silent with regard to taking the preventive and precautionary measures for the effect of Pod Borer. The Opposite Parties also stated that the yield of the crop depends on various factors:- i.e. a) Following the instructions for sowing the seeds. b) Proper manuring and watering, application of proper pesticides. c) What is rainfall and climate condition etc., d) What pesticides, fertilizers are used and when it was used. e) Source of water to the fields. f) Complainant is very much silent with regard to the same. When Pod Borer (or) Helicoverpa affected to Red gram below pest control measures ought to be taken. a) Sow pest tolerant varieties like LBEG 7 b) Follow intercropping of Bengal gram with coriander (1:6 or 2:6) c) Sow 4 rooms or sorghum all rounds the Red gram plot. d) Transplant 50-100 marigold seedlings all round the Red gram plot. e) Monitoring with Pheromone traps to control the pest at right stages. f) Use bird perches (50/ha) g) Use neem formulations for insect repelling (NSKE 5%) soon after the pest occurrence. h) Use biocides like BT @ 1 kg/ha and NPV @ 500 LE/ha twice at an interval of 7-10 days of the evening hours. i) If necessary spray Endosulfan 2 ml/1 or Chlorpyriphos 2.5 ml/1 or Quinolphos 2 ml/1 or Acephate 1g/1, 700/800 1trs of spray fluid per ha. The Opposite Parties also stated that before releasing the seeds from them, they send the seeds to quality analysis tests in full-fledged laboratory. After taking report from the laboratory, the good quality seeds only will be realized to the market. The said seeds of Red-gram are developed from ICRISAT. As per the Commissioner Report and also report of the Agriculture Officer the said field affected by Pod Borer and when inspected the fields by the Agriculture Officer the complainant was absent. The complainant has not taken any precautionary measures to save his crop from the Pod Borer that is why the complainant got low yield from the said crop. The loss incurred by the complainant is only due to his negligence, hence it is prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the CD No.20/2004 with exemplary costs After perusing all the Affidavits, documents filed by both the counsels, the Forum observe that the complainant did not furnish any documentary evidence regarding fertilizers and pesticides used in the said field. The allegations made by the complainant are not supported by any documentary evidence. In the absence of any documentary evidence one cannot attribute the deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties. As seen from the record when the Agriculture Officer inspected and given report regarding the affect of Pod Borer in the said complainant’s field i.e.Ex.B-1 the complainant not shown any document regarding steps taken by him to save his crop from the said Pod Borer. The complainant incurred loss by getting low yield is purely because of his contributory negligence. Hence the Forum concluded that the complaint has no merits. Hence dismissed but without costs. In the result there are no merits in the complaint filed by the complainant and accordingly the same is dismissed but without costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum today, the 31st March, 2008.) Sd/- Sd/- Member I/c President District Consumer Forum, Warangal. APPENDIX OF EVIDENCEON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANTON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT ON BEHALF OF OPs.Affidavit of Complainant filed Affidavit on behalf of OPs. filed. ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT EXHIBITS MARKEDEx.A-1 is the Xerox copy of the Pattedar pass book. Ex.A-2 is the Original Pahani for the year 2003-2004. Ex.A-3 is the Original Bill issued by Opposite Party No.2. Ex.A-4 is the Xerox copy of Agriculture Officer Letter. Ex.A-5,6,7 & 8 are Original Photographs and Negatives. Ex.A-9 is the Xerox copy of Consumers Council, Warangal Fax Message. Pesticides & Seeds, dated 18-08-2003. Ex.A-11 is the Original Receipt of Swathi Pesticides & Seeds, dated 11-11-2003 dated 15-11-2003. dated 29-11-2003. Pesticides & Seeds, dated 24-12-2003. Ex.A-15 is the Original Receipt of Arunal Fertilizers Depot, Pesticides & Seeds, dated 12-12-2003. ON BEHALF OF Opposite parties Ex.B-1 is the Original copy of letter dated 02-01-2004. Ex.B-2 is the Xerox copy of Lr.No.D/178/1/2003, dt.:19-1-2004 of I/c.Asst.Director Agriculture, Dist.Warnagal. Ex.B-3 is the Lr.No.A.O/Misc./03, dt.:02-01-04 of Agricultural Officer, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-4 is the Lr.No.A.O.Misc/03 dt.:13-01-2004 of Agricultural officer, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-5 is the Xerox copy of Statement, dated 02-01-2004 to Ch.Seetharamulu, Panchayathi Karyadarshi, Kuntapelly Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Ex.B-6 is the Xerox copy of Statement, dated 13-01-2004 to Ch.Seetharamulu, Panchayathi Karyadarshi, Kuntapelly Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. Sd/- Sd/- Member I/c President District Consumer Forum, Warangal. | 
