State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd. vs Shri. Sajan Shravan Patil on 31 March, 2009
1 F.A.506-04
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
MUMBAI, CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
Date of filing : 19.03.2004
Date of Order : 31.03.2009
FIRST APPEAL NO. 506 OF 2004
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO. 358 OF 2002
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM: JALGAON.
1. Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd.
Bhadgaon Road,
Pachora Dist. Jalgaon,
Through Shri. Umraosing Diwansing Patil,
At. & Post. & Tal. Pachora, Dist. Jalgoan.
2. Adarsha Krishi Kendra
Shop No.4, Chhatrapati Shivaji
Maharaj Complex,
At. Post & Tal. Erandole,
Dist. Jalgaon. Through,
Shri. Sanjay Hilalal Patil ... Appellant
VERSUS
Shri. Sajan Shravan Patil
R/o. Patarkheda Tq. Erandol,
Dist. Jalgoan. ...Respondent
Coram : 1) Mr. S.G. Deshmukh, Hon'ble Judicial Member
2) Mrs. Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
Present: Shri. M.S. Kapse, Legal Officer of respondent No.1 Adv. S.A. Pradhan, for the respondent
- :: ORAL ORDER :: -
Per Mr. S.G. Deshmukh, Hon,ble Judicial Member
1. The present appeal is filed by the Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd. and other the original opponents against the judgment and order dated 23.02.2004 in complaint case No.358/2002 passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon.
2 F.A.506-04
2. The complainant's case before the Forum is that, he is having agricultural land Gat No.83 admeasuring 2 hector 83 R situated at village Patarkheda Tq. Erandol Dist. Jalgaon. It is their joint family property. It is contended that, the complainant and his elder son Dangal Sajan used to cultivate the land. It is contended that on 11.06.2002 he purchased two bags of cotton seeds Nirmal-744 (Eshwarya) from the appellant No.2 produced by appellant No.1 for Rs.780/- each. It is contended that, the seeds in question were sown in two acres land on 27th June 2002. It is contended that he had spread Endosulfan, monocrotophos etc. even then the growth of crop was not satisfactory and thus, he filed the complaint regarding the defectiveness of seeds to Agricultural Officer, Erondal Tahsil and Agriculture Officer, Z.P. Jalgaon on 8th August, 2002. It is contended that accordingly the Seeds Committee Z. P. visited the land on 24 th Sept.2002 and submitted the report. It is contended that, the height of the crop was found to be half to one and half feet and each plant was bearing two boles and there was possibility of less yield. Accordingly, committee gave report. Thus, the complainant approached the Forum for compensation of Rs. 60,000/-, Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5000/- towards the cost.
3. The present appellants appeared before the Forum and resisted the claim. It is contended that, seeds provided by them were not defective. It is contended that, no notice about visit of seed committee was given to them. Thus, the report of seed committee was not binding on them. It is contended that, the growth of the crop or yield of the crop depends on many factors such as preparation of land, care, use of pesticides, insecticides, fertilizers, climate etc.
4. The Forum below after going through the papers and hearing the parties allowed the complaint and directed the appellant to pay 3 F.A.506-04 Rs.30,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint. Forum also directed the appellant to pay Rs.5,000/- towards the mental distress.
5. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order opponents came in appeal.
6. Notices were issued to the respondents. Shri. M.S. Kapse, Legal Officer of respondent No.1 appeared. Adv. S.A. Pradhan, appeared on behalf of respondent. We heard the legal officer for the appellant as well as the respondent at sufficient length. We perused the papers and the report of agriculture officer. On perusal of report it reveals that there is no whisper about the quality of seeds. No inference can be drawn against the appellant for supplying inferior quality of seeds.
7. In Indo American Hybrid Seeds & Anr. Vs. Vijaykumar Shankarrao & Anr reported in II (2007) CPJ 148 (NC), the National Commission has held that, Consumer Protection Act, 1986-Section 2 (1) ( r) Seeds-- Defective--Sale of - Evidence - Seeds produced by OP - Purchased from M/s. Soni Foods, not made party in complaint against OP - Crop growth not upto expectations - Report of agricultural authorities indicating only 10% of crop properly developed - No word in report against or about quality of seeds supplied - Variation in yield dependent on external considerations like climate, pesticides etc. - No evidence on record indicating seeds to be of non-standard quality - Courts to be led by evidence and proof on subject - In absence of evidence, unfair practice not proved.
4 F.A.506-04 In Sonekaran Gladioli Groweres Vs. Babu Ram reported in II (2005) CPJ 94 (NC), the Hon'ble National Commission held that, Consumer Protection Act, 1986- Section 2 (1) (g) and 21
(b) - Agriculture-Seeds - Sub-standard - Absence of clear finding regarding quality of seeds supplied - No interference can be drawn against petitioner - Non-standard quality of seed not proved - Complaint dismissed by Forum-Order set aside in appeal- Restored in revision.
8. We have mentioned that, there is no whisper about the quality of seeds in the report given by the committee. In view of the absence of any clear finding in the report of Seed Committee about defectiveness of the seeds we are unable to sustain the finding of District Forum about the quality of seeds in question. Deficiency is required to be proved; inference of the deficiency can not be drawn on the basis of report which is completely silent on the quality of seeds. Complainant failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. The report which is placed on record is not at all sufficient to establish the inferior quality of the seeds. There is no expert report on record supporting the claim on defectiveness of the seeds. In the circumstances, we are inclined to allow the appeal. We pass the following order.
-- O R D E R -
1. Appeal is allowed.
2. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Forum is hereby quashed and set aside.
3. Complaint stands dismissed.
4. No order as to cost.
5. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Mrs.Uma S. Bora S. G. Deshmukh
5 F.A.506-04
Member Presiding Judicial Member
Kalyankar