M SUBBA RAO vs AVULA VENKATA REDDY

-HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties. This Revision Petition is filed against the judgment and order dated 7th August, 2003 passed by the A. P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Appeal No. 135 of 1999 by which the order passed by the District Forum is confirmed. The District Forum by its order dated 25th February, 1999 directed the petitioner to pay a compensation of Rs. 7,500 for sale of defective chilli seeds to the Complainant. The State Commission also considered the fact that there was sufficient evidence on record to establish that complainant had purchased the seeds from the petitioner. The District Forum as well as the State Commission arrived at the conclusion that the yield of the chilli crop was not as per the advertisement or brochure. Against that judgment, this Revision Petition is filed by the dealer.

CONSIDERING the findings of fact recorded by the District Forum and the State Commission, it is apparent that seeds supplied by the petitioner were defective and that the complainant has suffered the loss because the yield was minimum and not as per the brochure. However, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is a dealer and he is not personally liable for defective seeds and therefore order ought not to have been passed against him without joining manufacturing firm as party, namely, Hindustan Seeds Corporation.

In our view, no doubt, the manufacturer would have been a proper party but at the same time the petitioner is a person who has supplied and sold the seeds to the complainant, therefore, complaint was maintainable against the petitioner. If petitioner has any grievance, it is open to the petitioner to recover the amount ordered from the manufacturer by filing appropriate proceedings, but it cannot be said that the petitioner, a dealer, who has sold the seeds, is not liable.

LASTLY, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no question of directing the petitioner to pay the interest @12% p. a. from the date of complaint till the date of payment. It is also to be stated that as per the interim order, in all, petitioner has deposited Rs. 11,800. The amount deposited by the petitioner with the District Forum shall be considered as full and final payment to the complainant. It would be open to the complainant to withdraw the same if not withdrawn.

CONSIDERING this aspect, in our view, impugned order passed by the State Commission does not call for any modification. In the result, Revision Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Revision Petition disposed of.