Haryana

StateCommission

A/11/2019

M/S SPRIHA BIO SCIENCE PVT. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

PARVEEN - Opp.Party(s)

ASHISH SAREEN

11 May 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                               

First Appeal No.11 of 2019

                                                Date of Institution: 03.01.2019

Date of Decision: 11.05.2023

1.      M/s Spriha Bio Science Private Limited, 227-A,Road No.36,  Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 5000033 through its Managing Director.

2.      M/s Tarsem Kumar & Company 25, New Anaj Mandi, Ismailabad, Distt. Kurukshetra through its proprietor.

…..Appellants

Versus

ParveenS/o Sh.Garib Singh R/o Village Keorak, Tehsil & Distt. Kaithal.

…..Respondent

CORAM:    S.P.Sood, Judicial  Member

         

                  

Present:-    Mr.Ashish Sareen, Advocate for appellants.

                   Mr.Ram Bhatt proxy counsel for Mr.Naresh Kumar, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                ORDER

S P SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

          Briefly stated, the facts narrated in the complaint are that on 22.05.2014, complainant purchased 04 bags of paddy seeds Pusa-1121 @ Rs.500/- per bag for Rs.2,000/- from opposite party No.1. The complainant had sown these seeds in his seven acres of land, however, there was no proper germination of the seeds as the same were of poor quality and even some plants were dwarf and some were of long height and when crop came at panicle stage again, it was found that some plants of the crop matured at early stage and some plants maturity got late.  He moved an application to Deputy Director Agriculture, Kaithal.  On 17.09.2014, the team of experts visited the field of complainant and reported that there was a mixture of different type of plants to the extent of 30-35%.  Due to this reason, complainant has suffered loss of Rs.90,000/- in respect of crops and sought Rs.4,000/- as compensation for physical harassment and mental agony and Rs.4500/- as litigation expenses.  The factum of the OPs having sold sub-standard and mixed paddy seeds to the complainant definitely amounts to deficiency in service on their part and hence the complaint.

2.      O.Ps filed separate written version. O.P.No.1 alleged that answering OP hassupplied 04bags of seed to the complainant all in sealed packed conditions and thus there was no fault on the part of OP and the complainant has concealed the true and material facts. On merits, the plea taken in the preliminary objections were reiterated and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.      OP No.2 filed separate written version alleging inter alia that complainant has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 13(i) (c) of the C P Act 1986. Further there was no deficiency in service on the part of the answering OP.

4.      After hearing both the parties, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra(In short “District Commission”) allowed the complaint vide impugned order dated 29.11.2018, which is as under:-

“Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to pay Rs.24,500/- as compensation for loss suffered by complainant and further to pay Rs.20,000/- as lump sum compensation on account of harassment mental agony and cost of litigation charges. Both the OPs are jointly and severally liable. Let the order be complied with within 30 days from the date of preparation of copy of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be entitled interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order till its realization.”

5.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.Ps-appellants have preferred this appeal.

6.      These argumentswere advanced by Sh.Ashish Sareen, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Shri Ram Bhatt proxy counsel for Mr. Naresh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent. With their kind assistance the entire record of appealas well as original record of the District Commission including whatever evidence has been led on behalf of parties has also been properly perused and examined.

7.       It is not disputed that the complainant purchased 04 bags of the paddy seed from the O.P.No.1 It is also admitted that upon complaint, a committee was constituted by Sub Divisional Agriculture Officer, Kaithal. There is a report prepared by the officials of the Sub Divisional Agriculture Officer, Kaithal (Ex.C-2) which clearly reveals that there was mixing of other variety of the crop due to which the complainant suffered loss.

8.      In fact as per the matrix of facts of the case, it is not in dispute that complainant had purchased seeds from O.P.No.1.  It is also not disputed that the above said seed were sown in his land. Since the seeds purchased by the complainant were not of good quality, that is why there was poor germination of the crop due to mixing of seed.  Since inspection report Ex.C-2 reveals there was mixing of other variety of crop to the extent of 30 to 35% due to which the complainant suffered loss.  The report issued by Agriculture department cannot be ignored or brushed aside.  The learned District Commission has adequately and properly compensated the complainant and directed the OPs to pay Rs.24,500/- on account of loss suffered by the complainant alongwith compensation.

9.      In view of the above observation and discussion, no illegality could be found with the order dated29.11.2018 passed by learned District Commission, Kurukshetra vide which the complaint was allowed and as such, the appeal being devoid of merits stands dismissed.

10.    The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant-
Parveen against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

11.              Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid Order.

12.              A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The Order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.

13.              File be consigned to record room.                  

 

11^thMay, 2023                                                                                   S. P. Sood                                                                                                                            Judicial Member                            

 

S.K

(Pvt. Secy.)