Murugesan,

s/o Ramasamy gounder,

3/11, Middle street,

Palaiyapalayam Village and Post,

Namakkal District. .. Complainant



/versus/

1. The Proprietor,

Priya Agro Enterprises,

D.No. 67/129, Paramathy Road,

Namakkal Town and District.



2. Manufactures and Distributors,

Nusun Genetic Research Limited,

501, Subhan Sirisampada complex,

Plot No. 6-3-1090/A/1,

Raj Bhavan road, Samajiguda,

HYDERABAD 82. Andhra Pradesh. ..Opposite Parties



This complaint coming on 1st day of July 2009 for final hearing before us in the presence of Thiru P. Chandrasekaran, Counsel for Complainant and Thiru N. Ragulan, Counsel for first opposite party and the second opposite party have chosen to set exparte and after hearing the complainant and after perusing the documents and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum passed the following order:
ORDER

1. The facts of the complaint is : -

The complainant on 14.4.2007 has purchased 2 Nos. of two kilogram bag of sun flower seeds “Max Nunsun Seeds” from the first opposite party. The cost of per kilogram of seed is Rs.270/- and for 4 kilograms the complainant has paid Rs.1,080/- to the first opposite party. The 2nd opposite party is the manufacturer of said seeds. The complainant purchased the said seeds on the advise of the first opposite party.

The complainant had sown the said seeds in his 2 acres of land situated in Survey No.97/2 Palaiyapalayam village, Namakkal District. The complainant had also applied DAP fertilizers. The complainant had spent a huge amount on the fond hope that he would be able to have good germination of seeds. The complainant states that only 20% of the seeds germinated and as a result he suffered huge losses. The complainant has obtained a report that the soil in his land is fit for agriculture of sunflower and the non-germination is due to defective seeds supplied by the first opposite party manufactured by the second opposite party. The complainant issued lawyer notice to the opposite parties but no reply has been received. The complainant had lodged this complaint alleging supply of defective seeds and had sought refund of the cost of seeds, compensation for loss of income, mental agony and cost.



2. The first opposite party has filed written version and the contentions in short are as follows:

The complainant has not made any recommendations. The sunflower seeds sold by him have 95% purity and 70% germinating capacity and hence they do not believe that 20% only germinated. That he has not made any recommendations to use medicine. He had sold quality seeds and the reason for non-germination of seeds is not due to quality of seeds. Hence, there is no deficiency in service and hence the complaint has to be dismissed.



3. The second opposite party have chosen to set exparte.



4. The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and if so to what relief the complainant is entitled for?



5. POINT : The complainant has filed proof affidavit along with 11documents and the same has been marked as Exhibits A1 to A11 and the 1st opposite party has not filed any proof affidavit.



6. The complainant on 14.4.2007 has purchased 2 Nos. of two kilogram bag of sun flower seeds “Max Nunsun Seeds” from the first opposite party.

The cost of per kilogram of seed is Rs.270/- and for 4 kilograms the complainant has paid Rs.1,080/- to the first opposite party. The complainant has produced and placed before us the cash receipt for Rs.1,080/- issued by the first opposite party and marked the same as Exhibit A1 to prove that the seeds were purchased from the first opposite party. The 2nd opposite party is the manufacturer of said seeds and the same can be seen from Exhibit A11. The fact is not disputed. The complainant had sown the said seeds in his 2 acres of land situated in Survey No.97/2 Palaiyapalayam village, Namakkal District. The complainant had also purchased and applied DAP fertilizers and medicines as recommended by the first opposite party. The cash receipts for the said purchases has been produced and marked as Exhibits A2 and A3. The complainant had spent a huge amount on the fond hope that he would be able to have good germination of seeds. The complainant states that only 20% of the seeds germinated and as a result he suffered huge losses. The photograph of the cultivated field is marked as Exhibit A5. The complainant had issued a lawyer notice to the opposite parties. The copy of the same has been produced and marked as Exhibit A4. Both the opposite parties have issued a reply to the complainant’s lawyer notice. The same has been marked as Exhibits A7 and A9 by the complainant.

The complainant had obtained a report that the soil in his land is fit for agriculture of sunflower and the non-germination of seeds is due to defective seeds supplied by the first opposite party and manufactured by the second opposite party. The complainant has produced and placed before us the report issued by the Agricultural Department, Government of Tamil Nadu as Exhibit A8. On perusal of the documents placed before us by the complainant, it can be evidenced that the seeds were purchased from the first opposite party and the drugs and fertilizers were applied by the complainant as per the recommendations of the first opposite party by purchasing the same from the first opposite party. The Agriculture Department has given the report after testing the soil of the complainant’s land establishes that there is no problem with land for cultivation of sunflower. The opposite parties have failed to produce and place before us their test report for the batch of seeds manufactured and sold to the complainant.

The opposite parties have failed to prove that the seeds sold by them are good quality seeds. In view of the above discussion and on perusal of the documentary evidences, we have no hesitation to hold that the opposite parties have manufactured and sold defective seeds to the complainant. The non-germination of seeds would have definitely resulted in avoidable expenditure and losses to the complainant and have caused mental agony to the complainant and his family members and as such he is entitled for compensation. In view of the above discussions, we hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and they are liable to pay compensation to the complainant. Point is answered accordingly.



7. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to refund the cost of seed of Rs.1,080/-(Rupees one thousand and eighty only) to the complainant. Further, the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.1,500/- as cost of this complaint. Time for making payment one month from the date of this order.