WHAT REMEDY IS AVAILABLE TO FARMERS IF
SEEDS SOLD ARE DEFECTIVE
Poor
quality of seeds has always been an issue raised by the farmers and complaints have been filed before the consumer forums by the aggrieved farmers
for redressal of their grievance and for compensation for their loss.These farmers not only suffer financial
loss due to defective seeds sold to them, but also lose their precious time
,almost one season of earning coupled with labour cost in the process. Hence it
is a serious matter of concern. These
cases have been contested by the opposite parties till Supreme court on the
plea that consumer courts have no jurisdiction to file the case under consumer
protection act because Seeds act has been enacted by the parliament for filing
application by the aggrieved person under the special Act i.e. Seeds Act. This issue was raised by the respondants in the matter of M/s.
National Seeds Corporation Ltd. Vs. M. Madhusudhan Reddy and another decided
on 16 July 2012:
“ the Seeds Act is a special legislation enacted for
regulating the quality of seeds and if the respondents had any grievance about
the quality of the seeds then the only remedy available to them was to either
file an application under Section 10 of the Seeds Act or to approach the
concerned Seed Inspectors for taking action under Section 19 read with Section
21 of that Act.”
Another issue raised in this case was about the
arbitration clause in the agreement and it was contested by the defending party
that matter can be heard by the arbitrator only :
“ in view of the
arbitration clause contained in the agreements under Section 8 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 entered between the appellant and the
growers, the latter could have applied for arbitration and the Consumer Forums
should have non-suited them in view of Section 8 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996”
Supreme court while dealing with both the above objections referred to number
of judgements by the apex court including Fair Air Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
And Anr. v. N.K. Modi reported in (1996) 6 SCC 385, State of
Karnataka v. Vishwabharthi House Building Coop. Society and Others reported
in (2003) 2 SCC 412, CCI Chambers Coop. Hsg. Society Ltd. v.
Development Credit Bank Ltd. reported in (2003) 7 SCC 233 and Indochem
Electronic and Another v. Additional Collector of Customs, A.P. reported
in (2006) 3 SCC 721. It has been observed by the Supreme Court in all these
cases that the Courts have to consider that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
confers additional jurisdiction upon Consumer Forums and not their exclusion.
Regarding
arbitration clause also Supreme court rejected the argument extended by the
respondant and relied upon the views expressed by the apex court in its earlier
orders in the matter of Secretary, Thirumurugan Cooperative Agricultural
Credit Society v. M. Lalitha (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others reported in (2004) 1 SCC 305,wherein it was held
that the existence of Arbitration Clause in agreement is no bar to the entertainment
of the complaint by the Consumer Forum, which is an additional remedy under the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The remedy provided under the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 is in addition to the provisions of any other law unless there is a clear
bar,
Now recently National Commission has also
endorsed that Consumer Forums can deal with agriculture issues following
supreme court judgement on the subject.In the matter of Maharashtra state
seeds Corpn. Ltd V Arvind Bajirao Borkar 1V[2013] CPJ 241 [NC] National
commission has awarded compensation in favour of complainant for his loss due
to failure of crops.
Now coming to
the provisions under Seeds act, we need to see how far these provisions are
helpful to consumers and why supreme court opened the option of consumer courts
for farmers inspite of remedy available to them through their special act.
The Statement of Objects
and Reasons enshrined in the Bill, which led to the enactment of the Seeds Act
read as under:
“In the interest of increased agricultural production in the
country, it is considered necessary to regulate the quality of certain seeds,
such as seeds of food crops, cotton seeds, etc., to be sold for purpose of
agriculture (including horticulture). The method by which the Bill seeks to
achieve this object are-
(a) Constitution of a Central Committee consisting of
representatives of the Central Government and the State Government, the
National Seeds Corporation and other interests, to advise those Governments on
all matters arising out of the proposed Legislation;
(b) fixing minimum standards of germination, purity and other
quality factors;
(c) testing seeds for quality factors at the seed testing
laboratories to be established by the Central Government and the State Governments;
(d) creating seed inspection and certification service in each
State and grant of licences and certificates to dealers in seeds;
(e) compulsory labelling of seed containers to indicate the
quality of seeds offered for sale, and
(f) restricting the export, import and inter-State movement of
non-descript seeds.”
The Statement of Objects
and Reasons enshrined in the Bill, which led to the enactment of the Seeds Act
read as under:
“In the interest of increased agricultural production in the
country, it is considered necessary to regulate the quality of certain seeds,
such as seeds of food crops, cotton seeds, etc., to be sold for purpose of
agriculture (including horticulture). The method by which the Bill seeks to
achieve this object are-
(a) Constitution of a Central Committee consisting of
representatives of the Central Government and the State Government, the
National Seeds Corporation and other interests, to advisethose Governments on
all matters arising out of the proposed Legislation;
(b) fixing minimum standards of germination, purity and other
quality factors;
(c) testing seeds for quality factors at the seed testing
laboratories to be established by the Central Government and the State
Governments;
(d) creating seed inspection and certification service in each
State and grant of licences and certificates to dealers in seeds;
(e) compulsory labelling of seed containers to indicate the
quality of seeds offered for sale, and
(f) restricting the export, import and inter-State movement of
non-descript seeds.”
Seeds Act is totally
silent on the issue of payment of compensation for the loss of crop on account
of use of defective seeds supplied by the appellant and others who may obtain
certificate under Section 9 of the Seeds Act. A farmer who may suffer loss of
crop due to defective seeds can approach the Seed Inspector and make a request
for prosecution of the person from whom he purchased the seeds.
Whereas
Consumer Protecton Act has been enacted for this very purpose inspite of having
number of acts for consumers already existing.
The salient features of
the Consumer Protection Bill were to promote and protect the rights of
consumers
(b) the right to be
informed about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of
goods t(a) the right to be protected against marketing of goods which are
hazardous to life and property;
o protect the consumer against unfair trade practices;
(c) the right to be assured, wherever possible, access to an
authority of goods at competitive prices.
(d) the right to be heard and to be assured that consumers
interests will receive due consideration at appropriate forums;
(e) the right to seek Redressal against unfair trade practices or
unscrupulous exploitation of consumers, and
(f) right to consumer education.
From
the Statement of Objects and Reasons and the scheme of the 1986 Act, it is
apparent that the main objective of the Act is to provide for better protection
of the interest of the consumer and for that purpose to provide for better
redressal, mechanism through which cheaper, easier, expeditious and effective
redressal is made available to consumers
Now coming to the legal points in the case in
hand,respondants have also raised the question of commercial purpose of the
farmers stating that crops were meant for re-sale.The actual facts found are
that the appellant had selected a set of farmers in the area for
growing seeds on their behalf. After entering into agreements with the selected
farmers, the appellant supplied foundation seeds to them for a price, with an
assurance that within few months they will be able to earn profit. The seeds
sown under the supervision of the expert deputed by the appellant. The entire
crop was to be purchased by the appellant. The agreements entered into between
the appellant and the growers clearly postulated supply of the foundation seeds
by the appellant with an assurance that the crop will be purchased by it. It is
neither the pleaded case of the appellant nor any evidence was produced before any
of the Consumer Forums that the growers had the freedom to sell the seeds in
the open market or to any person other than the appellant. Therefore, it is not
possible to take the view that the growers had purchased the seeds for resale
or for any commercial purpose .Hence on this very point also ,court rejected
the argument of respondants .
While checking with the facts of the case ,the reports of the
agricultural experts produced before the District Forum unmistakably revealed
that the crops had failed because of defective seeds/foundation seeds. After
examining the reports the District Forums felt satisfied that the seeds were
defective and this is the reason why the complainants were not called upon to
provide samples of the seeds for getting the same analysed/tested in an
appropriate laboratory. In our view, the procedure adopted by the District
Forum was in no way contrary to Section 13(1)(c) of the Consumer Act and the
appellant cannot seek annulment of well-reasoned orders passed by three
Consumer Forums on the specious ground that the procedure prescribed under
Section 13(1)(c) of the Consumer Act had not been followed.Hence it is observed
by the court that farmer is not expected to keep some samples with the presumption that they may need the
same for legal battle .The necessary things to be considered are the inspection
carried out by the inspectors about the quality of soil and method adopted by
the farmer while sowing the seeds which were found satisfactory.
The landmark
judgement is a master piece for the consumers on the issue of purchase of
seeds.
Dr Prem lata
Become a Member of the new revolution "Consumer Awakening" and instantly expand your knowledge with the Important Landmark Judgements, Laws Laid down by the Supreme Court for Consumer Rights, Get access to hundreds of Featured Articles in 2 different Languages; English and Hindi - a valuable professional resource to draw upon, and a powerful, collective voice to advocate for your protection of rights as a consumer nationwide.
Thank you for your interest in becoming a "Consumer Awakening" Member!
You will find information on Customer Rights, what we're doing and how to become a member. If you are looking forward to become a member of our portal and gain access to Hundreds of Featured Articles which will clearly give you an insight of yoru rights as a Consumer, then Read Further. more detail on our technologies and technology process,