BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.90 OF 2022 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.34 OF 2019, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION, KHAMMAM Between:

Azmeera Sukya, S/o.Latchiram, Age 40 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.2-208/1, Kasna Thanda Village, Khammam Rural Mandal, Khammam District.

.…Appellant/Complainant And

1. M/s.Keerthi Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietor, H.No.2-5-231/A, Hanuman Temple Road, Khammam.

2. M/s.Jeeva Logics Bio Tech (India) Private Limited, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory, H.No.17-1-391/T/91, Sarasvathi Nagar, Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad – 500059.

…..Respondents/Opp.Parties Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant : M/s.KRR Associates Mr.K.Rajeshwar Rao Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Opp.Party No.1: M/s.K.Mahesh Counsel for the Respondent No.2/Opp.Party No.2: Sri Sathakarni QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN…IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER-JUDICIAL TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble In-charge President)

1. This appeal is filed by the Complainant U/s.41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission to allow the appeal by setting aside the orders of District Commission, Khammam passed in CC.No.34 of 2019 dated 29.01.2021 and pass such other order or orders as this Commission deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and interest of justice.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The Appellant is the Complainant and the Respondents are the Opposite Parties in CC.No.34/2019.

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant is a resident of Kannegundla, H/o.Thodellagudem (V), Dornakal (M), Mahabubabad District and is an agriculturist who is cultivating his lands to raise commercial crops like chillies, cotton etc. He intended to raise chilli crop to an extent of Ac.1.00 Gts in Survey No.426/A. He approached Opposite Party No.1 and purchased the seeds as follows:

(i) Rudra F-1 Hybrid, Lot No.508407, 10 packets x 10 grams x

380/- which comes to Rs.3,800/- vide receipt No.285 dated

14.06.2018.

4. The said seeds were manufactured, produced, packed and marketed by Opposite Party No.2 respectively. The Complainant purchased the said seeds and raised the crop in the month of June and July, 2018 by investing huge amounts for cultivation, manuring and precautionary measures for applying pesticides and fertilizers on the advice of the agricultural officer and Opposite Party No.1. It is his grievance that the said chilli plants were without flowering and he approached Opposite Party No.1 and agricultural officer and reported the same. On his complaint, the Assistant Director of Horticulture-I, Mahabubabad visited his fields and opined that the crop was damaged due to defective seeds. In spite of taking all the precautions and following due procedures, he could not get even 10% flowering in his field. He claims that he is a consumer of the Opposite Parties and has filed the complaint for the loss sustained and towards the agony suffered.

5. The Opposite Party No.1 is M/s.Keerthi Enterprises and Oppoiste Party No.2 is M/s.Jeeva Logics Bio Tech (India) Pvt.Ltd. In their written version they have submitted that the allegations against them are baseless, that the Complainant suffered loss to the tune of Rs.3,74,800/- is without an iota of proof. They submitted that there is no defect in the seeds and the production and quality of the seeds has gone through various tests in the laboratories of the manufacturer and it is only after due specification the seeds would be delivered in the market. To that effect, the Government would issue the license for the marketing of the seeds. The complaint is filed at a belated stage after 150-180 days of sowing the seeds. Had there been any grievance, the Complainant would have approached the concerned authority in the month of November or December itself. No piece of evidence is filed to substantiate h