A.P. STATE SEEDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. REP BY ITS MANAGER, 4TH LANE KANNAVARI THOTA GUNTUR A.P Vs. NALLURI RAM BABU S/O SUBBAIAH R/O UNGUTRU AMRAVATHI MANDAL GUNTUR A.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 whereby the petitioner herein seeks to assail the order dated 6.1.2012 passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission") in F.A. No. 690/2011. By way of the impugned order, the order dated 23.6.2011 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Guntur (hereinafter referred to as "the District Forum") in C.C. No. 234 of 2010 has been set aside.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 27.7.2009, the complainant purchased 44Kgs. LRG 41 variety 'Redgram' seeds from the O.P., Kannavari Thota vide bill No. 229313. The seeds so purchased were accordingly sowed in the 14 acres of his farm land. However, the complainant noticed that the growth of the plants was not uniform. Some of the plants were growing taller while some others were having stunted growth. According to the complainant, the lack of uniformity in the growth in the plants was on account of defective seeds (impurity of seeds). On 19.11.2009, the complainant approached the Joint Director of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as "the JDA"), Guntur to enquire about the spurious nature of the seeds supplied to him and compensate him for the loss sustained by him. The JDA, Guntur, addressed a letter dated 20.11.2009 to the Associate Director of Research, Lam ARS asking him to depute the Pulses Breeder for crop inspection. In the report submitted by the Principal Scientist (Plant Breeder) to the Associate Director Lam ARS, it was mentioned that the maturity of the plant did not resemble LRG 41, only few plants resembled LRG 41. It is the case of the complainant that yield of Redgram in his neighboring fields was 10 quintals per acre while the complainant received only 2 quintals in spite of the fact that the crops had to be harvested thrice due to the difference in the growth of plants and their maturity. Huge investment was incurred on account of pesticides and labour apart from the costly seeds and all the investment had gone waste due to spurious seeds.

(3.) Aggrieved by the act of the O.Ps., the complainant approached the District Forum and filed a consumer complaint. The District Forum vide order dated 26.2011 dismissed the complaint.