The National Commission will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact in its limited revisional jurisdiction. Furthermore, when seeds have already been sown, the absence of a laboratory test report does not preclude a finding of deficiency if the manufacturer fails to provide evidence proving environmental factors caused the crop failure.

ORDER

DR. INDER JIT SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER

1. The present 3 Revision Petitions (RPs) have been filed by the Petitioners against Respondents as detailed above. As these RPs involve similar facts and questions of law and have been filed against the common order of State Commission, these have been taken up together. The detail of parties arrayed before the Fora below is given in the table below. Parties will be referred to as arrayed before the District Forum. However, for the sake of convenience RP/561/2025 has been taken as lead case.

2. RP/561/2025 has been filed against the order dated 20.09.2024 of the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad, (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission'), in First Appeal (FA) No. 485/2019, in which order dated 31.01.2019, of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Warangal (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint No. 211/2015 was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside the order passed by the State Commission.

3. Earlier RPs 562 & 563/2025 were dismissed on 09.05.2025 by this Commission on account of limitation. The Petitioner challenged the said order before the Telangana High Court, which was allowed vide order dated 25.09.2025, setting aside the order dated 09.05.2025 passed by this Commission with direction to dispose off the Revision Petitions in accordance with law. Accordingly, the cases were taken up on merits and notice was issued to the Respondents on 13.11.2025. Revision Petition No. 561/2025 was filed along with an application IA/4367/2025 for condonation of delay. Notice in RP as well as in the said IA was issued on 22.04.2025. Delay in filing the Revision Petitions is condoned after considering the reasons stated in the respective IAs and the cases are taken up on merits. Parties filed Written Arguments/Synopsis.

4. Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Forum and other case records are that:-

The complainant purchased Chilly seeds i.e. PHS DRVA-961 (3) packs each 10 grams for Rs.840/- and VNR Seeds VNR-145 (3) packs each 10 grams for Rs.840/- in total for Rs.1680/- from M/s Mamata Agro Chemicals on 14.04.2015 manufactured by M/s Prabhakar Hybrid Seeds and sowed the said seeds in his land to an extent of Ac.0.31 guntas in Sy.No.235/E/2 situated at Dharmaram Village, Geesugonda Mandal, District Warangal. As per the Complainant, he ploughed the land and made it fit for raising chilly crop and raised nursery crop and planted all nursery chilly plants in his land. The chilly plants grew-up healthy and ready for yielding position but crop did not come as shown in the seed packet and the yield is very low. The Complainant sent legal notice dated 20.08.2015 to the OP. On the request of the Complainant, the officials of OP Company visited the field of Complainant and observed that there were mixture of plants and the plants sown were not of their company and after inspection, OP's executive opined that there might be problem with the nursery. The Report given by Mandal Agricultur