Haryana

StateCommission

A/155/2015

SURJ BHAN AND OTHERS - Complainant(s)

Versus

SEEDS WIRJS INTERNATIONAL PVT. - Opp.Party(s)

ARUN LUTHRA

16 Mar 2017

ORDER

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

                                                First appeal No.155  of 2015

Date of the Institution: 13.02.2015

Date of Decision: 16.03.2017

 

1. Suraj Bhan S/o Dhannu Ram
2. Balwan S/o Dhannu Ram
3. Shish Pal S/o Dhannu Ram

All residents of Village Khurana, Tehsil & District Kaithal.

                                                                             .….Appellants

 

Versus

 

1. Seeds Works, International Pvt. Ltd. 437, Avenue 4, Banjare Hills Hydrabad-500034.
2. M/s Seeds Works International Pvt. Ltd. 52-B, Dartar Mandi,Shahabad Markanda,District Kurukshetra-136135.
3. M/s Haryana Agro Center SCF No.75-76, Gate No.5, New Anaj Mandi, Kaithal.

                                                                             .….Respondents

 

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    Mr.Deepak Verma, Advocate for the appellants.

                   Mr. D.S.Adlakha, Advocate for the respondents.

 

O R D E R

R.K.Bishnoi, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

          It was alleged by complainant that he purchased paddy seeds

 from opposite party (O.P.) No.3 on 15.05.2013 against the payment of Rs.8000/- and sowed in 13 acres of land as detailed in the complaint.  Average yield of crop per acre was 40 to 50 quintals and time of ripening was 120 days.  After sometime it was found that seed was mixed of two qualities. When he approached O.P.No.2 it was told that his field would be got inspected.  Dr.Pushpinder  sales officer of the company inspected his field on 06.09.2012 and photographs were also taken. As per his application Deputy Director Agriculture, Kaithal deputed Sh. Pawan Sharma Quality Control Inspector, Kaithal to visit the spot by constituting committee. They visited his fields on 17.09.2012 and reported that 35-40% plants were of dwarf size and going to ripe very shortly whereas other plants were yet to bear pods and ripen after 15-20 days. Due to defective seeds yield per acre was 14 quintals. Rate of paddy was Rs.1280/- per quintal. In this way he suffered loss to the tune of Rs.Six lacs and O.Ps. be directed to pay the same besides Rs.30,000/- for mental harassment etc. and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.

2.      O.P. Nos.1 and 2 filed the reply because O.P.NO.3 was proceeded against ex parte.  It was alleged by them that atleast four to six kilogram of  the seed was required for one acre. In this way they should have purchased 52 to 78 kgs of seed, but, as per their pleadings they purchased only 30 Kgs seed for 13 acre. Due to this reason less yield was there and seeds could not be blamed.  Less yield could be due to other factors also i.e. looking after crop, type of soil etc. Even otherwise seeds were not got tested from competent authority and provisions contained in Section 13 (1) (c ) of Consumer Protection Act of 1986 (In short “Act”) were not followed. The seeds were purchased for commercial activity and they were not covered by the definition of Consumer. Other averments were also denied and requested to dismiss complaint.

3.      After hearing both the parties learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (in short “District Forum”)  allowed the complaint vide impugned order dated 15.01.2015 and directed as under:-

“Thus, in view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to pay Rs.5,000/- per acre of land and total amounting to Rs.65,000/- (Sixty Five thousand) as compensation for loss suffered by the complainants and further to pay Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) as lump sum compensation on account of harassment, mental agony and cost of litigation charges. All the OPs are jointly and severally liable.”

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, complainnts have preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

5.      Arguments heard.  File perused.

6.      Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently argued that as per report Ex.C-8 there was loss of 35-40% per acre. Normal yield per acre is 40-45 per quintals, whereas in the present case yield was 14-15 quintals per acre. In this way they suffered loss to the tune of Rs.Six lacs whereas learned District Forum has awarded compensation on the lower side, so the same be enhanced. He placed reliance upon  the opinion of Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s National Seeds Corporation Ltd. Vs. M. Madhusudhan Reddy and another 2012 (1) C.P.J. 1.

7.      As per report EX.C-8 it cannot be presumed that loss was to the extent of 35-40%.  As per this report  35-40% plants were grown and fully ripened whereas other plants were to receive pods. It was only presumption and not definite report about loss, but, anyhow as per this report it is clear that the seeds were mixed and yield might be effected little bit.

8.      Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances it is clear that the compensation awarded by the learned District Forum is on lower side, so impugned order dated 15.01.2015 is modified  and O.Ps. are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- per acre to complainants total amounting to Rs.1,30,000/- and compensation qua mental harassment etc. is increased to Rs.25,000/- from Rs.5000/-.

9.      With this modification, appeal stands disposed of.

 

March 16th, 2017                    Urvashi Agnihotri                                R.K.Bishnoi,                                                               Member                                              Judicial Member                                                         Addl. Bench                                        Addl.Bench                

S.K.