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

MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.K. Dubey, President;
Mrs. Neelima Dubey & Mr. B.L. Khare, Members
AZIZ—Appellant
versus
EGALE SEEDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ORS.—Respondents
Appeal No. 1552 of 1999—Decided on 11.1.2001

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Kailash Joshi, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 1:Mr. S.R. Bhargava, Advocate.
For the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3: Absent.

Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2 and 14 - Complaint for deficiency in supply of substandard quality of seeds of wheat - Crop developed with Kharpatwar causing loss to complainant - District Forum dismissed complaint holding that complainant failed to establish that seeds were of substandard quality - Appeal- Appellant did not take steps to get sample of seeds examined from Seed Analyst Merely on basis of affidavit of complainant inference of substandard quality of seed could not be drawn - Proper growth of seeds depends on other agricultural operations also - Respondent possessed Indian Minimum Seed Certification Standard - Impugned order called for no interference. (Para)

       Result : Appeal dismissed.

       IMPORTANT POINT

       Complaint regarding poor substandard quality of seed could be established by report of Seed Analyst and not merely by affidavit of seed purchaser that seed was of poor quality.

       

ORDER

Mr. Justice S.K. Dubey, President—The complainant aggrieved of the order dated 31.8.1999 passed in Case No. 175/97 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ujjain (for short the ‘District Forum’) whereby the complaint for deficiency in service in supply of substandard quality of seeds of wheat of 3 quintals 60 kilos purchased from respondent No. 1 for Rs. 4,500/- which after sowing, the wheat plants were produced with Kharpatwar causing loss to the complainant, was dismissed, holding that the appellant has failed to establish that the seeds were of substandard quality mixed up with seeds of Kharpatwar.

2. We have heard Mr. Kailash Joshi, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Bhargava, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and perused the record.

3. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and on reappraisal of evidence on record, we find that the District Forum rightly held that the appellant has failed to establish the sub-standard quality of seeds. The appellant did not send the sample of seeds from the seeds purchased or from the suppliers for its examination by Seed Analyst. Therefore, merely on the basis of the affidavit of the complainant inference that the seeds were defective was not rightly drawn.

4. The submission of the learned Counsel for the respondent that the proper growth of crops depends not only on good seeds but also on other agricultural operations, viz., (1) proper preparation of the land; (2) fertilization; (3) pest and disease control; (4) proper irrigation; and (5) climate and seasonal conditions, deserves consideration. Therefore, when the appellant found that the seeds were defective, the action in accordance with the provisions of Sections 13, 15 of the Seeds (Amendment) Rules, 1974 ought to have been taken. See the decision of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore in Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. R.S. Bannumatti & Anr., I (1992) CPJ 248.

5. Learned Counsel for the respondent also placed before us Indian Minimum Seed Certification Standards, July, 1988 Edition wherein at page 24 “Seed Standards” of wheat is given, pure seed (minimum) 98.0% and Inert matter (maximum 2.0%).

6. In the circumstances the District Forum, in the absence of legal evidence, in our opinion rightly did not find any deficiency in service.

7. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be conveyed to the parties and a copy be sent to the District Forum alongwith the record of the case.

Appeal dismissed.

––








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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top