BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

F.A.No. 126 OF 2019 AGAINST ORDERS IN C.C.34/2016 DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION, ADILABAD Between:

1. The Manager/The General Manager BAYER BIO SCIENCE PVT., LTD., Ohris Techpark, Plot No.13, Sy.No.P64/2, Software Unit Layout, Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500 081 (TS), Rep by its Business Partner-Seeds-LPC.

2. The General Manager/Managing Director, Produced and Marketed By BAYER BIO Science Pvt., Ltd., Bayer House Central Avenue, Hiranadani Estate, Thane, Maharastra, 400 607.

……..Appellants No.1 & 2/ Opposite Party No.2 & 3 And:

1. T.Bhuma Reddy @ Bhumanna, S/o Ushanna, Aged 59 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o VG: Bandal Nagpur, Mdl: Tamsi, Dist. Adilabad.

……..Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. Priya Seeds & Fertilizers, Dealers in Seeds, Fertilizers & Pesticides, D.No.6-5-99/6, Dokwal Complex, Adilabad, Rep. by its Proprietor.

3. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Adilabad ……..Respondent No.2 & 3/Opposite Party No.1 & 4 Counsel for the Appellants No.1 & 2 /Opposite Parties No. 2 & 3 :

M/s. B.Aruna Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Complainant : M/s. KRR Associates Counsel for the Respondent No.2/Opposite Party No.1 :

Called absent Counsel for the Respondent No.3/Opposite Party No.4 : GP QUORUM :

HON’BLE SMT. MEENA RAMANATHAN, I/c PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI. V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER – (JUDICIAL)

SATURDAY, THE 2 9^th DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR **********

Order : (PER HON’BLE SMT. MEENA RAMANATHAN, I/c PRESIDENT) 1. The appeal is filed u/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3, aggrieved by the order of District Consumer Commission, Adilabad, dated 11.12.2018 in CC 34/2016 and prayed this Commission to set aside the said impugned order and pass such other order/s as this Commission may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The brief averments of the complaint are that the complainant is an agriculturist having land at Bandal Nagapur Shivar of Tamsi Mandal, District-Adilabad in Sy.No.47 to an extent of Ac.3-00 gts.; and in Sy.No.46/A to an extent of Ac.3.00gts. and in Sy.No.47/E to an extent of Ac.3-00gts. total Ac.9-00 gts. He has been cultivating and raising all types of crops especially cotton crop, since long. Lured by the advertisements given by the opposite parties, the complainant purchased First Class BT II seeds vide bill No.3429, dated 04.06.2015. He purchased 10 packets at Rs.930/- each and spent a total amount of Rs.9,300/-. He further submits that he incurred expenses of Rs.40,000/- per acre towards purchase of fertilizers, pesticides, labour charges and other incidental expenses. He further states that he sustained heavy loss because of supply of defective quality of seed and the same was informed to the opposite parties and also to the agricultural authorities concerned. His land was inspected and assessed and it was opined that the loss of crop was due to supply of defective quality of seed. The present complaint is filed against Opposite Parties for producing, selling and marketing defective quality of seed which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and therefore, the opposite parties are liable for payment of compensation to the complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The Opposite party No.1 filed counter stating that they are not aware that the complainant is a cultivator and having experience in cultivating and that he is having lands at Bandal Nagapur. This Opposite party is a dealer of Bayer Bio Science Pvt. Ltd., which produces BT II cotton seed variety and opposite party No.2 & 3 markets the same. On 04.06.2015 the complainant purchased two packets of first class BT II of said seed for Rs.9,300/- of his own choice. The opposite party No.1 never gave any suggestion to the complainant about the management of crop. The allegation of the complainant that he spent Rs.40,000/- towards labour charges, for seed fertilizers etc. and that the crop is still standing in the land is fa