BANADESHWAR AGRO AGENCIES Vs. SHIVARUDRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The factual matrix of this case is that the respondent who was the complainant in the consumer dispute is the owner and possessor of agricultural land bearing survey No. 362 measuring 12 acres 31 guntas situated at Bagalawad Village, Taluka Manvi, District Raichur. On 13.10.2007, he purchased 3 packets of Sorghum Hybrid Ajeet 333 seeds (Jawar seeds) for Rabbi season each containing 3 Kgs. from opposite party No. 1 vide bill No. 375. Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4 are the producers/ manufacturers of the Hybrid seeds in question. He sown the seeds in the month of October 2007 but at the time of semi maturity stage of the said Jawar crop, he noticed that there was no proper setting of the seeds. Similar was the fate Of some other farmers who had also grown the same brand of Jawar seeds in their lands. Eventually, the respondent could not harvest the crop due to its complete failure. The other farmers who had used Jawar seeds of other brands got good yield like 35 quintal per acre and sold the same at an average price of Rs. 1700 to 1800 per quintal. During the stage of setting of the seeds of Jawar crop, the complainant and the other similarly placed farmers brought the matter to the notice of the respondents requesting them to visit their field to make spot inspection but they did not turn up. During the first week of January 2008, the respondents and other farmers requested the Inspector of Seeds, Agricultural Department, Manvi and Raichur in the matter but they also did not give any response. The respondent and others also requested Director of Agricultural Sciences, Gulbarga for necessary action but there was no response. Thereafter, they sent a requisition to the University of Agricultural Sciences and Assistant Director of Research, Raichur who visited the field of the complainant and other similarly placed farmers and gave a report in the matter to the complainant and also to the Joint Director of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur. Led by the publicity given by the opposite parties regarding their Jawar seeds in question, which would give high yield about 34 to 38 quintal per acre, the respondent and some other farmers had purchased such seeds but their crop failed. Besides the purchase price of the seeds, the respondent had also spent substantial amount in his field in regard to the crop in question but sustained loss of more than Rs. 80,000 in the process. Treating this act on the part of the opposite parties in supplying defective seeds as an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, the complainant filed the complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raichur ('District Forum' for short) for awarding a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 with interest @ 18% p.a. along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 including the cost. Notices were issued by the District Forum to the opposite parties and based on the submissions made by the parties and evidence produced, the District Forum held the opposite parties No. 1 to 4 liable for deficiency in service and hence directed vide its order dated 27.1.2009 jointly and severally to pay a total compensation of Rs. 1,15,000 towards loss and damages including the cost to the complainant within a period of 6 weeks from the date of the receipt of the order. The opposite parties challenged this order before the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore ('State Commission' for short) who, after hearing the parties, vide its impugned order dated 17.8.2009, upheld the order passed by the District Forum and dismissed the appeal filed by the opposite parties. It is against this impugned order that the petitioners have filed the present revision petition.

(2.) After the preliminary hearing, limited notice came to be issued by us regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the District Forum and upheld by the State Commission.

(3.) We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the respondent who is now represented through his legal representatives because of his death. The main ground on which the impugned order in respect of the quantum of compensation is assailed by the petitioners is that the award of compensation of Rs. 1,15,000 directed by the Fora below is arbitrary and on the higher side. According to them, the average yield of Jawar is about 10 quintal per acre and since admittedly seeds in question were sown on only three acres of land by the respondent, the total yield would not have been more than 30 quintals in the case of the complainant. Since the average price of Jawar per quintal is less than Rs. 1,000, according to the respondent, the total loss, if any, would not have been of more than Rs. 30,000 to the complainant. It is not the case of the respondent that there was total loss rather only the expected yield is not achieved and as such, the compensation to be awarded should not have exceeded Rs. 30,000. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the Fora below committed grave error in accepting the submission of the respondent without any basis and hence the conclusion drawn by them which is not supported by any documentary evidence deserved to be set aside and the quantum of the compensation reduced suitably. On a specific question by us, learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is no documentary evidence to sttpport this submissions made on behalf of the petitioners regarding the average yield of 10 quintal per acre as also the price of Jawar being less than Rs. 1,000 per quintal.