INDO AMERICAN HYBRID SEEDS Vs. VIJAYAKUMAR SHANKARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -APPELLANTS were the opposite parties before the State Commission, where the respondents had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the appellants.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are, that a number of complainants purchased seeds produced by the appellant from one M/s. Soni Food. The arrangements were that M/s. Soni Food will sell the seed to M/s. Temptation Food Limited, Pune, who guaranteed to buy whatever produce of the crop would be there. The rate of produce was also fixed and likewise an agreement was made with M/s. Temptation Food Limited. The seed for Broccoli crop was purchased which was a produce of the appellants and was planted in December 1993. Due care was taken and necessary cropping practices were adopted. Complainants also attended a get-together organised by the appellants at Hotel Sangam at Karhad on 21. 2. 1994. When the complainant did not find the crop growth upto the expectations in the third week of February, the complainants contacted the officials of the appellant company, who made certain suggestions, but yet seeing no improvement in the expected crop output, they reported the matter to the agriculture authorities who submitted a report, according to which the complainants would get only about 10% of the Broccoli thus causing a grave loss. Thus alleging deficiency in service a complaint was filed before the District Forum, claiming slightly over Rs. 9,00,000 with interest. The State Commission after hearing the parties allowed the complaint and directed the appellants to pay Rs. 9,07,500 on account of sale of defective seed which amounted to an unfair trade practice by the appellants. The amount was to be paid within 4 weeks of the passing of the order failing which it was to carry interest @ 18% p. a. A compensation of Rs. 15,000 each was granted to each of the individual agriculturists along with cost of the seed purchased from the appellant. Aggrieved by this order, this appeal has been filed before us.

(3.) WE heard the learned Counsel for both the parties at some length and perused the material on record. It is interesting to see that while in the complaint itself it is mentioned that they purchased the seed from M/s. Soni Food/ M/s. Temptation Food Limited and it is with the latter that they got into an agreement for purchase of the final produce, yet they were not made parties before the State Commission. What surprises us is that despite this, the State Commission has gone on to give an award against appellants.