BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER

       DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BAGALKOT.

COMPLAINT NO.108/2016
Date of filing: 32/07/2016

Date: 20^th day of February, 2018

   P r e  s e n t: 

01) Smt.Sharada.K.                                                    President…

     B.A.LL.B. (Spl) 

02) Smt. Sumangala.C.Hadli.                         Lady   Member…

                            B.A (Music)

                V/s

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SMT. SUMANGALA.C.HADLI, MEMBER

The Complainant filed this complaint u/sec. 12 of Consumer protection Act, 1986 seeking direction to Opposite Parties (herein after referred in short as Ops) to pay the damages to the tune of Rs.4,45,800/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of filing of this Complaint, to till the date of payment of damages to the complainant, cost and such other reliefs deems fit under the circumstances of the case.

2.   Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The complainant is a resident of Kunchanur village of Jamkhandi Taluka by profession he is an agriculturist and having agricultural land situated in Survey No.122/1B+2+3+ 4+5+6+7 of the Kunchanur village. OP No.1 is the dealer of Fertilizers, Micronutrients, Pesticides and Seeds and OP No.2 is the Manufacturer. On 30.01.2015, the complainant purchased 9 packets of the sunflower seeds of a brand name ‘S ARMONI GOLD S/F 2 KG’ AT THE RATE OF Rs.1,000/- for each packet by paying the total of Rs.9,000/- from OP No.1. After purchasing the said seeds from the OP No.1, sowed the said seeds in his 9 Acres of land. The complainant after sowing the seeds engaged his full efforts to nurture the crop. After the certain period, the complainant observed that the growths of the sunflower trees are to the sufficient extent, whereas the sunflower grains were not formed to the sufficient or at an expected rate. At this juncture, the complainant approached the OP No.1 at his shop and narrated him the condition of the crop of the Sunflower, for which he used the seeds purchased from OP No.1. For the above explanation of the complainant, regarding failure of the sunflower crop, the OP No.1 told the complainant that he will send some persons to the complainant’s field and they will inspect and examine the sunflower crop, accordingly OP NO1 has sent some persons to the complainant’s field, the said persons visited the complainant’s field and they have thoroughly inspected the condition of the sunflower crop in complainant’s field and they have told the complainant that the reason for not forming of the sunflower grain is because of the defective quality of seeds sowed.

3.      At this juncture, the complainant approached the State Agriculture Department and requested to send the experts to his field for inspection of the Sunflower crop, heeding the request of the complainant, the said Department deputed the team of the experts to inspect and examine the complainant’s land and reported that the reason for failure of his sunflower crop is only because of the deficiency in the quality of sunflower seeds sowed. Hence, complainant has sustained heavy financial loss and mental agony because of the deficiency in service of the OP No.1 and 2 by supplying the defective quality of sunflower seeds. Inspite of spending such a huge money and engaging his efforts, the complainant had sustained loss of yield of Rs.3,50,000/-. The complainant has approached the OP No.1 and 2 several times and requested both of them to pay the damages and settle the matter, But, both the Ops have refused the heed the request of the complainant. The complainant to recover the loss caused to him by the act of the Ops went into vain, thus the Ops are jointly and severally to pay the damages to the tune of Rs.4,45,800/-. The complainant left with no other option, constrained to file this Complaint for the relief sought from this Hon’ble Forum.   

4.      After receipt of notice, the OPs-Counsel present before the Forum and OP2 filed Written Version and the same has been adopted by OP1.  

          Written Version of OPs are as hereunder:

          The Complaint filed by the complainant is totally false. Ops admitted that OP1 is a seller of OP2 seeds at Jamakhandi and the OP2 is the Manufacturer of Armoni Gold Sunflower seeds and also other types of seeds from so many years, having good name, fame and reputation in the market and selling their seeds throughout in India with care and cautions. Ops also admitted that complainant produced purchased bill No.499 stands in the name of Girish Chanal Kanchanur, but the R and R extract of landed property bearing it R.S. No.122/1B+2+3+4+5+6+7, 26 Acres 07 Gutas stands in the difference name. In Para No.5 of the Complaint, the complainant has stated that he “sowed the said seeds in his 9 acres of land”, but in the R of R extract there is no such 9 acres shown which are stands in the name of complainant. Ops also submitted that Ops have to pay Rs.4,45,800/- with 24% interest, but he has not shown or furnished any yield certificate issued by the Agriculture Officer and also not furnished the price of sunflower yield per quintal in the year 2015 by APMC Yard and only in the imagination for grapping huge illegal profit has prayed baseless Rs.4,45,800/- without any proper calculation.

          5.      Ops also submitted that the complainant has filed the Complaint in Para 9 stated that “Karnataka said Agriculture Dept. team of the experts has visited and examined complainant’s field and have reported that the reasons of failure of his sunflower crop is only, because of the deficiency in the quality of the seeds sowed””. But the complainant had not stated on which date of experts team visited his land and also the scanned by cam scanner is totally black, words are invisible and it is very difficult to read or verifying the said documents and also it is very difficult for the OP No.2 to contact to whom, as who visited the land and issued the scanned by cam scanner copy. Hence on this ground the complainant is liable to dismiss. OP No.2 always testing their seeds not only from their laboratory and also from University of Agriculture Science (UAS), Dharwad. Hence, for all these reasons, OP respectfully prayer to this Hon’ble Forum be pleased dismiss the Complaint with cost, in the interest of justice and equity.       

6.     The complainant has produced documents. The said documents are as follows:

1. Tax Invoice dated: 30.01.2015,

2. 2 Photographs,

3. 1 Photograph,

4. Xerox copy of Letter written to Asst. Director of

    Agriculture.

5. Record of Right of complainant,

6. Sunflower crop Inspection Report,

7. Legal Notice,

8. RPAD Acknowledgement,

9. Reply of Notice of OP No.1,

10. Director of Agriculture University Letter dated:

      11.7.2015,

11. Inspection Report dated;18.04.2015,

12. Photos Xerox copy.

13. Crop Certificate

14. Record of Rights,

15. Death Extract,

16. Living Members Certificate

17. APMC Market Rates.

7.      By way of evidence, complainant has filed affidavit and filed 15 documents in support of his case. On the other hand, OP No.2 one representative of OP2 Company Sri.Basavaraj.A.B. Sales Unit lead Syngenta India Limited, Bagalkot has filed Chief affidavit. Both parties have filed Written Arguments. Heard the arguments and perused the documents.

8.      After considering the material placed on record, the following points that would arise for our consideration.

1. Whether the complainant has prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?
2. Whether the complainant has entitled to get compensation?
3. What order?

9.    After considering the evidence tendered by both sides and on careful consideration of the arguments advanced by both sides our findings for the above points are as follows.

1. Negative,
2. Negative,

2) As per final order.

R E A S O N S

10.  POINT NO.1 and 2: As there two points are inter-connected with each. In the instant case, it is undisputed fact that on 30.01.2015, the complainant purchased 9 packets of the sunflower seeds of a brand name ‘S ARMONI GOLD S/F 2 KG’ AT THE RATE OF Rs.1,000/- for each packet by paying the total of Rs.9,000/- from OP No.1. The complainant argued that after the certain period, the complainant observed that the sunflower grains were not formed to the sufficient or at an expected rate. At this juncture, the complainant approached the OP No.1 at his shop and narrated him the condition of the crop of the Sunflower, for which he used the seeds purchased from OP No.1. For the above explanation of the complainant, regarding failure of the sunflower crop, OP NO1 has sent some persons to the complainant’s field, the said persons visited the complainant’s field and they have thoroughly inspected the condition of the sunflower crop in complainant’s field in his said Complaint. Thereafter, the complainant approached the State Agriculture Department and requested to send the experts to complainant field for inspection of the Sunflower crop, heeding the request of the complainant, the said Department deputed a team of experts to inspect and examine the complainant’s land and reported that the reason for failure of his sunflower crop is only because of the defect in the quality of sunflower seeds sowed.  

11.    Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the complainant has not produced Yield Certificate. The agricultural University, Dharwad Experts have not visited the land of the Complaint. The Yield Certificate produced by the complainant is of other fields of Jamkhandi Taluk and even the name of the complainant has not appeared in given Report. The Xerox copy of documents furnished by the complainant is from different villages.

12.    The land is joint family property. The complainant has not made party of the other members. The Hon’ble Supreme Court rulings produced by the complainant are not applicable to present case in hand. Hence, there is no evidence to show that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and the documents produced by the complainant pertaining to the Certificate of Agricultural University are in different names. Hence, considering all the documents and reasons, we come to the conclusion that complainant has failed to prove his case beyond reasonable doubts.  In the light of our findings and reasons, we answer Point No.1 and 2 are in negative.

13. POINT NO:3 In the result, the complaint of the complainant is fit to be dismissed. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

1. Complainant’s complaint is dismissed with cost.

2. The complainant has to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) towards cost of this Complaint and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) for mental agony for the Ops have suffered.

3. The complainant has directed to comply this order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order, failing which Ops have liberty to proceed the case against the complainant.
4.  Free copy of this order shall be sent to the parties immediately.

        (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Forum on this ____ day of February, 2018).