KESARI VENKATA REDDY vs ANAPARTHY VENKATA CHALAPATHI RAO

THE appellant herein, Kesari Venkata Reddy filed a complaint, O.P. No. 187/1992 before the Guntur District Forum alleging that on 14.3.1992 he purchased 25 kgs. of Bhendi seeds at the rate of Rs. 30/- per kg. from Sri Kanaka Durga Seeds Centre, Guntur (opposite party No. 1) for a total sum of Rs. 750/-, that the seeds were manufactured by Mahendra Hybrid Seeds Company (P) Ltd., Jalna, Maharashtra (opposite party No. 2) that the 1st opposite party represented that the seeds are of high quality and the plants would not be affected by yellow disease and if any loss was caused to the complainant he would compensate the same, that he planted the said seeds in an extent of Ac. 3.80 cents in March, 1992 but the plants became white and the entire crop failed and that he sustained loss of Rs. 29,000/-. He prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a total sum of Rs. 29,750/- as compensation.

THE 1st opposite party filed a counter admitting the sale of the seeds in question to the complainant but denying that he represented to the complainant that the seeds were of high quality and that the plants would not be affected by white disease and that if the complainant sustained any loss to the crop he would compensate the same. He also contended that the seeds sold by him were certified by the Andhra Pradesh Seeds Certification Agency recognised by the Andhra Pradesh Government, that the crop of the complainant was affected by Y.M.V. disease on account of the negligence of the complainant in taking necessary precautions to protect the crop from the said disease and that he is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant. The 2nd opposite party also filed a separate counter stating that the complainant has to prove that the Bhendi seeds purchased by him from the 1st opposite party were manufactured by it, that the Bhendi seeds i.e. P.K. Variety sold by it were used by most of the farmers, that the seeds of their Company are of goods quality and they were approved by the Government, that none of the farmers who used the said seeds complained about the quality of the seeds, that the said seeds recorded satisfactory germination, that the crop of the complainant was affected by the disease known as yellow vein mossaie and consequently the crop was damaged, that the complainant should have taken precautionary measures such as spraying of insecticide and fungicides and removal of infected plants at the proper time to prevent the spreading of the disease to other plants, that on inspection by the representative of their Company it was noticed that the crop of the complainant was affected by Y.V.M. disease after 75% of the crop was picked up by the complainant, that a suitable reply was given to the notice given by the complainant, that in Guntur District the Bhendi plants are suspectable to Y.V.M. disease caused by Jassids and white flies and not because of the quality of the seeds, that they have not given any warranty to the seeds and that they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

At the time of enquiry the complainant filed his affidavit and got Exs. A1 to A14 marked in support of his claim. The opposite parties also filed third party affidavits of six persons who own lands in the vicinity of the complainant''s and stating that they also purchased P.K. variety of Bhendi seeds produced by the 2nd opposite party and sold by the 1st opposite party and the yield was good in the year 1992. The 2nd opposite party got some documents marked as Exs. B-1 to B-12.

AFTER considering the material on record, the District Forum found that the complainant failed to establish that the loss of crop in his lands was due to defect in the seeds, that the report of the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the District Forum revealed that there was good germination and the loss of crop was due to Y.V.M. disease which is a virus disease and which is likely to spread to other plants if necessary precautions were not taken at the appropriate time and, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to claim compensation against the opposite parties. According the District Forum dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by the said dismissal order the complainant preferred this appeal. Counsel for the appellant was not present and there was no representation for the appellant, when this matter came up on 19.1.1999. We have gone through the material on record and the order of the District Forum. The District Forum categorically found on the basis of the report of the Advocate Commissioner appointed during the pendency of this case that the Bhendi crop as such is suspectable to Y.V.M. disease, that the said disease which is caused by white flies would affect the entire crop if precautionary measures are not taken at the appropriate time to prevent the spreading of the disease to other plants and that because the germination was good the loss of crop of the complainant cannot attributed to the defect in the seeds. It was also found by the District Forum that the crop of the complainant was affected by the disease at a later stage after he has harvested most of the crop and that the complainant failed to establish that the loss of the crop was due to defect in the seeds. It may be noticed that six neighbouring farmers have given affidavits stating that in the same area they planted the same seeds and the yield in their lands was very good. The Advocate Commissioner appointed by the District Forum submitted a report after inspecting the crop stating that 90% of the complainant''s crop was affected by the disease and that there were no traces of removal of any plants in the complainant''s land. He also reported that the neighbouring ryots have removed the plants affected by the disease and saved the crop from the disease and that the plants grew up very well.

THE contention of the opposite parties is that the disease known as Y.V.M. disease is common in Guntur District and the farmers raising the Bhendi crop have to take precautionary measures to prevent the spreading of the said disease. THE complainant as reported by the Advocate-Commissioner does not seem to have taken necessary precautions to prevent the spreading of the same disease to other plants. In the circumstances, we agree with the findings of the District Forum and hold that the complainants failed to establish that the loss of the crop was due to defective seeds supplied by the opposite parties and we do not find any basis to interfere with the order of the District Forum. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. Appeal dismissed.