CHENNA RAYUDU Vs. PRABHAT AGRI BIO-TECH LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is unsuccessful complainant.

(2.) THE case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased 8 packets of Prabhat sunflower hybrid seed each containing 2 kgs on 2.9.2002 from R2 dealer manufactured by R1 paying Rs. 350 per each packet. He sowed them in the second week of September, 2002 in 8 acres of land situated in Konganapadu village. Though there was flowering there was ill -filling of seeds in the heads of the plants leading to poor setting of 15% to 20% leaving the remaining flowers chaffy. The other farmers who had sown the very same seed suffered the very same fate. When the said fact was informed to Joint Director of Agriculture, Kurnool, and Agricultural Officer, Kallur Mandal, a team of Agricultural Officers, Government Officials visited the fields in the presence of representatives of respondents and observed that the seeds were adulterated. Though the respondents promised to reimburse the loss they did not do so, and therefore he filed the complaint claiming Rs. 1,50,800 together with compensation of Rs. 20,000 and costs.

(3.) R 1 the manufacturer resisted the case. It alleged that the complaint was barred by limitation. It put the complainant to prove each and every fact alleged by him viz., purchase of seeds, raising crop in his land, seed setting in each of the head was poor and that the officers had visited the crop in the presence of their representatives. However, it admitted that it was the manufacturer of the seed and R2 is its dealer. It also admitted that the Joint Director of Agriculture, Kurnool vide his proceedings dated 17.12.2002 constituted an MOU Committee for inspecting the fields and directed its representative to be present. Accordingly on 23.12.2002 the Senior Scientist and other officials visited the fields. They found that there is no genetic variation. They did not award any compensation as they did not find that the seed was defective. Since the very complaint discloses that the seed has been germinated, grown and flowered properly and evenly it cannot be find fault with for getting low yield if there is any. There may be several factors for non -setting or poor setting of seed viz., lack of moisture in the soil, lack of irrigation facility, unsuitability of soil, poor soil fertility, and poor management practices, etc. The certificate issued by the test laboratory shows that germination is 83% and the genetic purity is 98.8%. By 14.3.2003, shell life of the seed was expired. The complaint was filed subsequent to expiry of the period, so as to see that the seed test could not be done by any laboratory. There was no deficiency of service on its part and therefore prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.