State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sheetal Hybrid Seeds Private Limited vs Shri Manikrao Baliram Patil on 30 March, 2010
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMM CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI First Appeal no. 1179/2005 Date of Filing: 04/07/2005 Consumer Complaint No. 118/2000 District Consumer Forum: Nashik Date of Order: 30/03/2010 Sheetal Hybrid Seeds Private Limited Appellant A-2, Old M. I.D.C., (Org.Opp.Party no.2) Jalna- 431 203. V/S 1. Shri Manikrao Baliram Patil, Respondents R/at- Hingalwadi, Tal- Kalwan, (Org.Complainant) District- Nashik. 2. M/s. Manas Agro Services, Shop No.4, Satelite Plaza, Dindori Naka, Opp.Market Yard., Panchwati, Nashik. Present: Adv.Mr.J.M.Baphana for appellant, Adv.Ms.S.P.Naik @ Mr.Nehe for respondent no.1 and Adv.Mr.M.S.Kumthekar for respondent no.2. And First Appeal no.1218/2005 Date of Filing: 07/07/2005 Consumer Complaint No. 118/2000 District Consumer Forum: Nashik Date of Order: 30/03/2010 M/s. Manas Agro Services, Appellant Through - Prop-Shri Kishore Kshrisagar, (Org.Opp.party no.1) Seeds seller, Presently R/at0 Lasalgaon- Tal- Nifad, District- Nashik V/S 1. Shri Manikrao Baliram Patil, Respondents R/at- Hingalwadi, Tal- Kalwan, (Org.Complainant) District- Nashik. 2. Sheetal Hybrid Seeds Private Limited A-2, Old M. I.D.C., (Org.Opp.Party no.2) Jalna- 431 203. Present: Adv.Mr.M.S.Kumthekar for appellant. Adv.Ms.S.P.Naik @ Mr.Nehe for respondent no.1 and Adv.Mr.J.M.Baphana for respondent no.2. Quorum : Mr.S.R.Khanzode,Honble Presiding Judicial Member.
Mr.D.Khamatkar, Honble Member.
:- ORAL ORDER :-
Per Shri D.Khamatkar, Honble Member:
These appeals are filed against the order of District Forum, Nashik dated 06/06/2005 in consumer complaint no. 118/2000.
The A.no. 1179/2005 is filed by the Seeds Company while the A.No. 1218/2005 is filed by the Distributor. In both the appeals the order under challenge being the same therefore, both the appeals are clubbed together and common order is passed.
Admittedly, respondent no.1 in both the appeals is org.complainant. He has purchased the seeds of Onion from Sheetal Hybrid Seeds Pvt. Ltd. and the seeds have been distributed by Manas Agro Services. The org.complainant after preparing the land for cultivation, planted the seeds. However, the seeds in stead of growing into onions, bolts were visible on the plants and hence, the complainant made a complaint to the Agricultural Development Officer of Zilla Parishad and accordingly, the Agricultural Development Officer, Zilla Parishad along with the Marketing Officer of Seeds Company has visited the field on 04/04/2000 and prepared a report suggesting that bolts are visible on the crop and it may affect the crop of onion by 60%-70%. Hence, the org.complainant has filed a complaint before the District Forum, Nashik requesting to grant loss of income of Rs.61,250/-, for mental agony Rs.25,000/-. Ld.District Forum after hearing both the parties has awarded an amount of Rs. 31,580/- for the plantation, Rs.25,000/- as compensation for the seeds and Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards the cost and all these amounts were directed to be paid jointly and severally by the org.opp.aprty no.1 & 2 along with interest @9% p.a. for the delayed payment if any.
Ld.Counsel Mr.Baphana J.M. has argued the case on behalf of Seeds Company. He pointed out that respondent no.1/org.complainant has not produced a cogent proof to prove that seeds were sub-standard. He further pointed out Ld.District Forum has relied on the Panchanama made by the Agricultural Development Officer dated 04/04/2000. Ld.District Forum had not taken into consideration the fact that for the good production of any crop various factors i.e. water, land, climate, pest-control, fertilizers and crop management are important. The respondent/org.complainant had only relied on the report given by Agricultural Development Officer. Ld.Counsel has further submitted that literature from the books of Vegetables Crops of India (4th Edition) by Shri K.S. Yawalkar and pointed out that bolting in the onion is due to the interaction of various factors i.e. temperature, cultivation, time of planting each of the seedlings, availability of nutrition. Ld.Counsel has drawn our attention to the judgement passed by State Commission, Maharashtra State, Mumbai in F.A.No.2643/2006 wherein the Commission held that District Seeds Enquiry Committee has only made an observation and on the basis of observation, it is concluded that seeds were defective. The Commission further held that bolting is the result of so many factors and it is the duty of the District Seeds Enquiry Committee to disclose the exact defects of the seeds. The observations of the Commission in the instant case are very relevant. In the present matter, Ld.District Forum has only relied on the report of Agricultural Development Officer / District Seeds Enquiry Committee. Further the respondent no.1/org.complainant also did not preserve the seeds, which he used for his cultivation. There is not laboratory report showing that the seeds were not of the required standard. Ld.Counsel for the respondent no.1/org.complainant had only relied on the report of Agricultural Development Officer / District Seeds Enquiry Committee. In view of the aforesaid legal and factual position, we pass the following order:-
:-ORDER-:
1.
A.no.1179/2005 7 1218/2005 are allowed.
2. Impugned order passed by District Forum is hereby quashed and set aside.
3. Complaint stands dismissed.
4. Parties shall bear their own costs.
3. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties as per rules.
(D.Khamatkar) (S.R.Khanzode) Member Presiding Judicial Member Nbh