SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HYDERABAD
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Parvatha Rao, President;
Mr. K. Ranga Rao & Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Members
KESARI VENKATA REDDY—Appellant
versus
ANAPARTHY VENKATA CHALAPATHI RAO & ANR.—Respondents
FA No. 1054 of 1995—Decided on 18.2.1999

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Koneti Raja Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 1:Mr. V. Gourisankara Rao, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 2:Mr. H. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate.

The complainant has to prove that the loss of crop was due to defective seeds supplied by the opposite parties.

Headnote:

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 - SALE OF DEFECTIVE SEEDS - BURDEN OF PROOF - COMPENSATION - The complainant failed to establish that the loss of crop was due to defective seeds supplied by the opposite parties.

Fact of the Case:

The complainant purchased Bhendi seeds from the opposite party and planted them in his field. The crop failed due to Y.V.M. disease, and the complainant claimed compensation from the opposite parties.

Finding of the Court:

The District Forum found that the complainant failed to establish that the loss of crop was due to defect in the seeds. The Advocate Commissioner appointed by the District Forum reported that the Bhendi crop is susceptible to Y.V.M. disease, which is caused by white flies and can affect the entire crop if precautionary measures are not taken. The complainant failed to take such measures, and the disease affected 90% of his crop.

Issues: Whether the complainant established that the loss of crop was due to defective seeds supplied by the opposite parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The burden of proof lies on the complainant to establish that the loss of crop was due to defective seeds. The complainant failed to discharge this burden. The District Forum rightly dismissed the complaint.

Final Decision: The appeal is dismissed.

ORDER

Mr. K. Ranga Rao, Member—The appellant herein, Kesari Venkata Reddy filed a complaint, O.P. No. 187/1992 before the Guntur District Forum alleging that on 14.3.1992 he purchased 25 kgs. of Bhendi seeds at the rate of Rs. 30/- per kg. from Sri Kanaka Durga Seeds Centre, Guntur (opposite party No. 1) for a total sum of Rs. 750/-, that the seeds were manufactured by Mahendra Hybrid Seeds Company (P) Ltd., Jalna, Maharashtra (opposite party No. 2) that the 1st opposite party represented that the seeds are of high quality and the plants would not be affected by yellow disease and if any loss was caused to the complainant he would compensate the same, that he planted the said seeds in an extent of Ac. 3.80 cents in March, 1992 but the plants became white and the entire crop failed and that he sustained loss of Rs. 29,000/-. He prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a total sum of Rs. 29,750/- as compensation.

2. The 1st opposite party filed a counter admitting the sale of the seeds in question to the complainant but denying that he represented to the complainant that the seeds were of high quality and that the plants would not be affected by white disease and that if the complainant sustained any loss to the crop he would compensate the same. He also contended that the seeds sold by him were certified by the Andhra Pradesh Seeds Certification Agency recognised by the Andhra Pradesh Government, that the crop of the complainant was affected by Y.M.V. disease on account of the negligence of the complainant in taking necessary precautions to protect the crop from the said disease and that he is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

3. The 2nd opposite party also filed a separate counter stating that the complainant has to prove that the Bhendi seeds purchased by him from the 1st opposite party were manufactured by it, that the Bhendi seeds i.e. P.K. Variety sold by it were used by most of the farmers, that the seeds of their Company are of goods quality and they were approved by the Government, that none of the farmers who used the said seeds complained about the quality of the seeds, that the said seeds recorded satisfactory germination, that the crop of the complainant was affected by the disease known as yellow vein mossaie and consequently the crop was damaged, that the complainant should have taken precautionary measures such as spraying of insecticide and fungicides and removal of infected plants at the proper time to prevent the spreading of the disease to other plants, that on inspection by the representative of their Company it was noticed that the crop of the complainant was affected by Y.V.M. disease after 75% of the crop was picked up by the complainant, that a suitable reply was given to the notice given by the complainant, that in Guntur District the Bhendi plants are suspectable to Y.V.M. disease caused by Jassids and white flies and not because of the quality of the seeds, that they have not given any warranty to the seeds and that they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

4. At the time of enquiry the complainant filed his affidavit and got Exs. A1 to A14 marked in support of his claim. The opposite parties also filed third party affidavits of six persons who own lands in the vicinity of the complainant’s and stating that they also purchased P.K. variety of Bhendi seeds produced by the 2nd opposite party and sold by the 1st opposite party and the yield was good in the year 1992. The 2nd opposite party got some documents marked as Exs. B-1 to B-12.

5. After considering the material on record, the District Forum found that the complainant failed to establish that the loss of crop in his lands was due to defect in the seeds, that the report of the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the District Forum revealed that there was good germination and the loss of crop was due to Y.V.M. disease which is a virus disease and which is likely to spread to other plants if necessary









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top