Back
SUBHASH CHANDRA, J. RAJENDRA
Hybrid Cotton Seeds, Fortune Hybrid Seeds Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Bhukya Bhadru – Respondent
ORDER
Subhash Chandra, Presiding Member—This Revision Petition has been filed under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, ‘the Act’) challenging order dated 20.12.2022 of the Telangana State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Vijayawada (in short, the ‘State Commission’) dismissing Appeal Nos. FA 682 of 2019 and FA 273 of 2020, vide order dated 20.12.2022 and confirming the order of the District Forum, Warangal in Consumer Complaint No. 8 of 2012 dated 27.06.2019.
2. This order will also dispose of Revision Petition Nos.938 to 1014 of 2023 and 1101 to 1108 of 2023 which emanate from similar orders and agitate the same grievances.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and given careful consideration to the material placed on record and the arguments urged before us.
4. The relevant facts of this case, in brief, are that the petitioner is a manufacturer of BT cotton seeds which are sold under the name of Laya Bt.2 cotton seeds. The respondent no.1 is a farmer owning 1.32 acres of agricultural land in Pallarguda village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal district who had purchased 1 packet of Laya Bt.2 cotton seeds for Rs.750/- on 12.06.2010 and plant
(1) ELISHA – The District Forum has also erroneously held that the Agriculture Department officials failed to get an ELISHA test done timely since that test was admittedly not available in 2010-11 in....
Farmers purchasing seeds for cultivation are recognized as consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and can claim compensation for crop loss due to defective seeds.
Burden of proof regarding seed quality lies with the respondent, who must provide evidence against claims of defects.
(1) Crop Failure - in the normal course, a farmer cannot be expected to retain seeds for use as sample in anticipation of crop failure.(2) Revisional Stage - The contention that the report of the com....
(1) Burden of Proof for Defective Goods – The primary onus lies on the complainant to prove that the seeds supplied were defective or spurious. In cases involving seeds, the absence of a recognized l....
(1) Burden of Proof on Manufacturer – In cases alleging defective seeds, the burden lies strictly on the seed manufacturer to produce samples of the disputed batch for expert analysis under Section 1....
Revisional jurisdiction of National commission – The Court can intervene only when the Petitioner succeeds in showing that the Fora below have wrongly exercised its jurisdiction or there is a miscarr....
Sale of Seeds – Selling the seeds, without mentioning batch number, lot number or tag number, etc., is gross deficiency of services, as well as unfair trade practice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
