State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M/S. Ankur Seeds Pvt.Ltd., vs Ganesh Walu Dhande on 9 April, 2010
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI First Appeal no. 1139/2009 Date of Filing: 11/09/2009 Consumer Complaint No. 331/2008 District Consumer Forum: Nashik Date of Order: 09/04/2010 M/s. Ankur Seeds Pvt.Ltd., Appellant 27, New Cotton Market Lay-Out, (Org. Opp.Party no.2) through its Director V/S 1. Ganesh Walu Dhande, Respondents r/at- Padli Deshmukh, (Org.Complainant) Tal- Igatpuri, Dist- Nashik. 2. Mahalaxmi Krishi Sewa Kendra, Shop No. 2729/B, Ghoti, Tal- Igatpuri, Dist- Nashik. Quorum : Mr.S.R.Khanzode,Honble Presiding Judicial Member.
Mr.D.Khamatkar, Honble Member.
Present: Adv.Mr.A.J.Bhoot for appellant.
Adv.Mr.V.G.Sabnis for respondent.
:-
ORAL ORDER :-
Per Shri D.Khamatkar, Honble Member:
This appeal filed by the appellant is directed against the order passed in consumer complaint 331/2008 on 30/06/2009 by District Forum, Nashik. The facts of the case can be summarized as under:
The complainant/respondent no.1 has purchased seeds from Mahalaxmi Krishi Sewa Kendra/respondent no.2 of Rupali Variety which were manufactured by the appellant. He has sown the seeds in his agriculture land. However, it was noticed that seeds were of sub-standard quality. Hence, respondent no.1 complained to the District Agricultural Development officer regarding the sub-standard quality of seeds.
Accordingly, committee constituted by Government for the enquiry of sub-standard seeds of District level visited the filed of the respondent no.1 and did Panchanama wherein it was found that there is mixture to the extent of 70% to 75% other than the original seeds and which was harmful to the crops.
Hence, respondent no.1/org.complaiannt has filed consumer complaint praying that compensation of Rs.1 Lakh and Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and amount to be paid with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of sowing and Rs.5,000/- as a cost. Ld. District Forum enquired into the complaint and passed order on 30/06/2009 allowing the complaint partially and awarded compensation of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.1,000/- as cost to be paid within 30 days from the date of the order and in case of delay interest @ 6% p.a. on the aforesaid amount be paid. It is against the order dated 30/06/2009, the present appeal is preferred.
Admittedly, the appellant is a manufacturer of the seeds purchased by the respondent no.1 and the seeds are purchased from respondent no.2 by the org.complaiannt/respondent no.1. The appellant as well as respondent no.2 does not deny purchase of the seeds and respondent no.1 is a consumer of respondent no.2 and the appellant.
It is also admitted facts that respondent no.1 has informed the appellant and respondent no.2 regarding the sub-standard quality of the seeds. The District Seeds Verification Committee has visited the filed of respondent no.1 on 14/10/2008 and did the site inspection and Panchanama and observed that nearly 70% to 75% mixture in the seeds and came to the conclusion that because of mixture in the seeds, it will affect the yield of the crops. Ld.Counsel for the appellant has contended that for the guidance of the Seeds Verification Committee, the Government has issued a circular dated 02/01/1984. Said circular explains the procedure to be followed by the committee members. The committee has to collect the information from the dealer regarding a lot number to the seeds, release orders to the manufacturer, whether the complaints received from other cultivators and has to give clear cut opinion after following procedure enumerated in circular dated 02/01/1984 and contended that committee has not followed the procedure explained in the Government circular. Ld.Counsel further contended that as the Seeds Verification Committee has not followed the due process, probative value of the opinion of the Seeds Verification Committee is greatly reduced and said report cannot be taken into consideration. Ld.Cousel further pointed out to the affidavit of one Mr.Madhukar Tulsiram Jadhav and Shivaji Madhu Shirsat which is at page 35,36,37,38 of the appeal compilation and contended that though they have used the same seeds in their field, the crops are not affected. Ld.Counsel for the appellant also pressed reliance on various judgement of State Commission which are as follows:
1.
F.A.No.744/2008 in case of Shri Somnath K.Ghodse V/s. Shri Vilas G.Jagtap & Ors. , dated 05/05/2009.
2. F.A.No.836/2007 in case of M/s.H.U.Gugle V/s. Sanjay J. throat & Ors. dated 19/12/208
3. F.A.no.795/2006,796/2006,798/2006, 799/2006, 800/2006, 803/2006, 804/2006, 805/2006, 806/2006, 808/2006 & 809/2006 in case of Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. V/s. Shri Zumbar K.Patil dated 23/12/2008
4. F.A.No.1207/2008 in case of Golden Seeds Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Bhikaji Narayan Bhavnath dated 18/02/2009 wherein it is held that the crop depends upon various factors such as climatic variations, excessive rain, proper care of the crops, dry spell, etc. So simply because the complainant got bad yield, it cannot be held that seeds supplied by the appellant were of defective quality and adulterated. It is the fact that Ld. District Forum only relied on the report of the Seeds Verification Committee.
Ld.Counsel for the respondent no.1 had contended that poor agriculturists should not be held responsible for the incorrect procedure followed by the Seeds Verification Committee. On the face of records though it looks relevant, however, the procedure laid down can not be overlooked. In view of the authorities quoted by the Ld.Counsel for the appellant, District Seeds Verification Committee has not followed the due procedure and hence, relying on the same the order passed by District Forum cannot sustain in the eye of law. In view of the aforesaid legal and factual position, we pass the following order:
:-ORDER-:
1. Appeal is allowed.
2. Order passed by the District Forum is hereby quashed and set aside.
3. Complaint stands dismissed.
2. Dictated on dais in presence of parties.
3. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties as per rules.
(D.Khamatkar) (S.R.Khanzode) Member Presiding Judicial Member Nbh