IMPORTANT POINT
Concurrent finding of fact recorded by Fora below cannot be interfered with.

D.K. Jain, President—Delay condoned.

2. This bunch of 32 Revision Petitions has been preferred by M/s Super Agri Seeds Private Limited, a producer of Paddy seeds and M/s. Shree Balaji Fertilizers, the distributor of the said seeds. Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in the Original Complaints, questioning the correctness and legality of a common order, dated 19.11.2015, passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Hyderabad (for short “the State Commission”) in Appeal Nos. 188, 190-194, 207-209, 221-224, 353-356, 361-370, 195, 204-206 of 2015. By the impugned order, the State Commission, while affirming the finding returned by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Anantapur (for short “the District Forum”) in relation to the inferior quality of seeds, has reduced the amount of compensation in each of the cases.

3. The subject matter of the Complaints as well as the afore noted Appeals being identical, all the Revision Petitions are being disposed of by this common order. However, in order to appreciate the controversy involved and the rival stands thereon, we shall advert to the facts leading to the filing of Revision Petition No. 1133 of 2016, as illustrative.

4. Sometime in the month of September, 2013, the Complainant, a farmer, purchased “Super Aman” and “Super Varun” brand paddy seeds manufactured by Petitioner No. 1, to raise paddy crop, with an expected yield of 70 to 80 bags per acre. However, noticing that there was no proper seed setting for almost three months of the sowing, he approached Petitioner No. 2 and informed it about the total loss of crop. Having failed to elicit any positive response, on 22.1.2014, he approached the Mandal Agricultural Officer. Similar representations were made by other farmers who had also cultivated paddy with same variety of seeds, purchased from Petitioner No. 2. The Mandal Agricultural Officer visited the fields in one of the villages along with the Seed Inspector and observed that there was no germination of the seeds. He noticed similar conditions in some other fields as well. The Mandal Agriculture Officer submitted his preliminary report to the Assistant Agricultural Officer, recommending a detailed inquiry by the experts. In furtherance of the said report, a Committee of Experts, comprising Principal Scientist (Pathology), Principal Scientist (Agronomy), Sr. Scientist (Entomology) and Scientist (Genious and PI Breeding) was appointed. The said Committee of Experts k submitted its report, opining that the loss of crop was on account of the following factors:—

(i) The period of sowing paddy was contrary to the recommended date of sowing, which neither comes under Kharif nor Rabi crop season;

(ii) The flowering coincided with unusual minimum temperatures of 11-15°C, which might have led to partial sterility; and

(iii) Dry and deep cracks were developed in the fields due to stoppage of irrigation, causing exposure of crop to moisture stress at critical stages from flowering to grain formation stage resulting in chaffiness.

It was also stated in the report that cool temperature sensitivity at pollen formation time was believed to be more critical period in causing sterility which led to chaffy grains. Nevertheless, the Committee recommended that the said case may be treated as Natural calamity because the farmers were put to 100% loss due to climatic factors.

5. Being dissatisfied with the report of the g Committee, the Complaint was filed before the District Forum, praying for a direction to the Petitioners to pay a compensation of a sum of Rs. 5,33,600 with future interest @ 18% p.a. till the date of realization.

6. As expected, the Complaint was resisted h by the Petitioners. Written Version was filed on behalf of Petitioner No. 1, which was adopted by Petitioner No. 2.

7. On a meticulous analysis of the oral and documentary evidence in particular, the testimony of the Assistant Director of Agriculture (RW 2), the Dis