GANGARAM vs MANAGER, M.P.RAJYA TILHAN SANGH

THIS is a complainant''s appeal against the order dated 24.10.1996 passed in Case No. 499/94 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore (for short the ''District Forum'').

THE facts giving rise to this appeal are thus that the complainant purchased 14.80 quintal seeds of soyabeen at the rate of Rs. 1,150/-, total Rs. 17,020/- in 37 bags. He sown 32 bags of seeds in between 29.6.1994 and 30.6.1994 in his fields. Out of this only few seeds sprouted. THE seeds were of sub-standard quality which caused damage to crops therefore, claimed compensation of Rs. 20,000/-. THE complaint was resisted. It was submitted that after the examination of the seeds from the laboratory it was found that the seeds so sold were of standard quality. After sowing of seeds there was a heavy rainfall which caused damage to the crops of the complainant. A measurement report of rainfall was filed alongwith the defence version. THE District Forum after appreciation of evidence held that the complainant though has asserted that the sample of the seed was got examined, but, that report has not been produced. Without the report of the quality of the seed, it cannot be said that the seed sold was of sub-standard quality. Hence, placing reliance on the decision of the Haryana State Cosumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case of Rajendra Singh v. Veerendra, II (1994) CPJ 127, dismissed the complaint. With the appeal an application to condonation of delay of two days has been filed. The appellant has also filed documents that is letter dated 25.2.1995 of the Deputy Director, Agriculture, District Indore addressed to the Manager of the opposite party; a news-item dated 29.4.1997 published in Nai Duniya daily to demonstrate that seeds sold and supplied by the opposite party were of inferior and sub-standard quality.

Having heard Mr. Ravindra Chhabra, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Verma, learned Counsel for the respondent, we are of the view that delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned and is hereby condoned.

HOWEVER, on merits, we are of the opinion that District Forum rightly dismissed the complaint in the absence of the report about the defective or sub-standard quality of the seeds. It was submitted before us that Deputy Director, Agriculture has issued a show-cause notice to the opposite party on the basis of the report of examination of the sample of the seed of the Seed Examination Officer, Gwalior which shows that the seeds sold had only 26% sprouting or growing. This notice also shows that after sowing the seeds in the field, the Senior Agriculture Development Officer went to the fields of the complainant for inspection who gave a report which shows that sprouting or growing of the seed was only in between 10 and 15%. But, with this letter also no test report of examination of the seed is filed. It is also not known whether the Manager of the opposite party was prosecuted and if so, its result or what action was taken after receipt of the reply. Therefore, in the absence of the report of the analyst of the sample of the seed of the appropriate laboratory, without going into the defence that there was a heavy rainfall, it cannot be held that the seeds so supplied were of inferior or sub-standard quality. To say so we place the reliance on the decision of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in case of Rajendra Singh v. Veerendra (supra). In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed. A copy of this order be conveyed to the parties and a copy of this order be sent to the District Forum alongwith the record of the case. Appeal dismissed.