Haryana

StateCommission

A/364/2019

KOHINOOR SEED FIELDS INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SANDEEP AND ANOTHER - Opp.Party(s)

MANOJ KUMAR SOOD

16 May 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                         First Appeal No.364 of 2019

                                                Date of Institution:16.04.2019

                                                          Date of order:16.05.2023

 

Kohinoor, Seed Fields India Pvt. Ltd. Through its Director, KansalSadan, AB-26, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi 110088.

…..Appellant

Versus

1.      Sandeep S/o Sh.Ramphal, R/o Village Dhanana, Tehsil and Distt. Bhiwani.

2.      M/s Agree Business Centre, Naya Bazar, Bhiwani.
 

…..Respondents

 

CORAM:    S.P. Sood, Judicial  Member

                  

Present:-    Mr. M.K.Sood, Advocate for theappellant.

                   Mr.AnilGhangas proxy counsel for Mr.AjayChiikara, Advocate for the respondent No.1.

                   Mr. Naman Nanda, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

F.A. No.546 of 2019

Date of Institution: 31.05.2019

Date of order: 16.05.2023

 

M/s Agree Business Centre, Naya Bazar, Bhiwani, through its legal proprietor Smt.Sangeeta.

…..Appellant

Versus

1.      Sandeep S/o Ram Phal r/o Village Dhanana Tehsil and Distt. Bhiwani.

2.      M/s Kohinoor Seed Fields India Pvt. Ltd., having its office situated at KansalSadan, AB-26,Shalimar Bagh, Delhi-110088, through its Authorised Representative.

…..Respondents

CORAM:    S.P. Sood, Judicial  Member

                  

Present:-    Mr.Naman Nanda, Advocate for theappellant.

                   Mr.AnilGhangas proxy counsel for Mr.AjayChiikara, Advocate for the respondent No.1.

                   Mr.M.K.Sood, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

 

                                                ORDER

S P SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

Delay of 32 days in filing the First Appeal bearing No.546 of 2019 is condoned for the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay.

2.      Vide this common order above mentioned two appeals bearing No.364 of 2019and F.A. No.546 of 2019will be disposed of as boththese appeals have been preferred against the order dated 13.03.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhiwani (in short ‘District Commission).

3.       The brief facts of the case are that on 21.04.2014 complainant purchased cotton seeds “Kohinoor AAH-I” one bag for Rs.600/-but batch No. of the bag was not mentioned on the bill. The complainant sown the seed in one acre of land properly, but, the growth of the cotton was not upto the mark as the height of cotton plant wentupto 5 ½ feet only.  Infact the seed sold by OPs were  ofsub standard quality. There was shortfall in the production of cotton to the extent of 95% as such complainant suffered huge loss. He spent Rs.8000/- per acre on his crop but still did not get proper yield.  Faced with this situation he took up this matter with Agriculture Department, Haryana at Bhiwani and  requested it to assess his loss of yield due to defective and sub standardseeds supplied by the respondent. The agriculture experts inspected his crop and gave a report dated 22.09.2014 vide which they concluded that seed purchased by the complainant weresub standard.The complainant requested OPs to pay him some compensation but to no avail. Thus there being deficiency in service on the part of the OP, hence the complaint.

4.      Notice issued to the OPs.   They appeared and filed its separate written statements.  OP No.1  submitted that  answering OP has not sold any seed of make Kohinoor to him.  The answering OP has sold Rs.300/- per bag instead of Rs.600/- per bag. The complainant had sown four acres of land whereas he had purchased only two packets of seeds i.e. 400 gm per packet, whereas 1 kg 200 gm to 1 kg 500 gm of seedswere required to be sown in one acre of land. The complainant has not sown full quantity of seeds and have the low yield. Thereforecomplainant was not entitled for any compensation as prayed for.

5.      OP No.2 filed in its written statement alleged that complainant was not consumer of the OPs as no seeds were sold to him. The complaint has filed this complainant in collusion with OP No.1. The OP No.1 was not  the distributor of the answering OP.Thus there was no deficiency in service on the part of the answering OP and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

6.      After hearing both the parties, the learned District Commission, Bhiwani has allowed the complaint vide order dated 13.03.2019, which is as under:-

“Therefore, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and the OPs are directed:-

1. To pay Rs.30,000/- (Thirty thousand only) as loss of cotton crop of one acre in all to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its final realization.
2. To pay Rs.5000/- (Five thousand only) as counsel fee as well as litigation charges.

11.    However, it is made clear that OP No.2 being  producer of the seed in question is liable to pay 70% of the total compensation and remaining 30% shall be paid by OP No.1 being seller of the seed in question.

          The compliance of the order shall be made within 30 days from the date of the order. In case of default, the OPs shall liable to pay interest @ 18% p.a. on total amount as directed above vide clause No.i to ii from the date of default i.e. after 30 days from the date of this order i.e. 13.03.2019.”

7.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.P No.1 as well as OP No.2have preferred these appeals.

8.      Arguments heard. With their kind assistance entire record of both of the  appeals as well as that of the District Commission including whatever evidence has been led on behalf of  both the parties has been properly perused and examined.

9.       It is not disputed that complainant purchased cotton seeds of brand named Kohinoor AAH-1 after buying from OP No.1 but marketed by OP No.2.  It is not disputed that these seedswere sown by complainant in his land.  It is also not disputed that due to poor quality of seeds, the cotton seedsdid not geminate  properly. It is also not disputed that complainant moved an application for inspection of his field before the Dy. Director Agriculture, Bhiwani due to poor quality of seeds. The inspection was carried out, which revealed that cotton seedswere ofsub standard quality. Since the seeds purchased by the complainant were not of good quality, that is why there was poor gemination of the seeds. The report  annexure C-2issued by Agriculture department cannot be ignored.   Even the height of the plants were not appropriate and the combined effect of all these shortcomings was on the over all yield of the crop. Moreover although OP No.2 is alleging that there was no privity between itself and complainant, but, there is no doubt that seeds which were purchased by complainant and later on sown by him  were marketed by none other but  OP No.2 only.  That being so how both of these OPs could escape liability towards complainant. The learned District Forum has adequately and properly compensated the complainant and directed the O.Ps. to pay Rs.30,000/- on account of loss suffered by the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% as compensation. The learned District Commission has righty allowed the complaint of the complainant partly.

10.    Resultantly, the contentions raised on behalf of the present appellantsin both the cases stands rejected as rendered no assistance and found to be untenable and the order passed by the learned District Commission does not suffer from any illegality or perversity and is well reasoned and accordingly stands maintained for all intents and purposes.  Hence, both appeals bearing No.364 of 2019 and F.A.No.546 of 2019 stands dismissed on merits.

11.    The statutory amount of Rs.25000/- each deposited at the time of filing the first appeal bearing No.364 of 2019 and first appeal No.546 of 2019be refunded to the respondentNo.1-complainant-Sandeep  S/o Ramphal against appeal  No. 546 of 2019 only against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

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

13.              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.

14.              File be consigned to record room.

15.              The original judgement be attached with appeal No.364 of 2019 and certified copy be attached with appeal No.546of 2019.

 

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

S.K(Pvt. Secy.)