M/S. NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. versus M. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2012] 2 S.C.R. 1065 · Decided: 16-01-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2012) 2 S.C.R. 1065 
M/S. NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. 
v .. 
M. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY AND ANOTHER 
(Civil Appeal No. 7543 of 2004) 
JANUARY 16, 2012 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] 
Consumer Protection Act,. 1986: 
A 
B 
ss. 12 and 2(d)(i) - Complaints fHed by farmers/growers c 
of seeds before the District Forums alleging failure of the 
crops/less yield on account of defective seeds supplied by the 
Government Company-appellant and praying for award of 
compensation - Maintainability of - Held: The Seeds Act is 
a special legislation enacted for ensuring that there is no 
D 
compromise with the quality of seeds sold to the farmers and 
others and provisions have been made for imposition of 
substantive punishment on a person found guilty - However, 
there is no provision for compensating the farmers etc. who 
may suffer adversely due to loss of crop/less yield on account 
E 
of defective seeds supplied by a person authorised to sell the 
seeds - Seeds Act and the Rules do not exclude farmers from 
the ambit of the Consumer Act who are otherwise covered by 
the wide definition of 'consumer' uls. 2(d)- Since the farmers! 
growers purchased seeds by paying a price to the appellant, 
they would certainly fall within the ambit of s. 2(d)(i) - They 
F 
cannot be denied the remedies available to other consumers 
of goods and services - Thus, the District Forums have the 
jurisdiction to entertain the complaints filed by the farmers -
Seeds Act, 1966. 
s. 3 - Failure of crops/financial /OS$ to farmers/growers 
of seeds on account of use of defective seeds sold/supplied 
by appellant-Government Company - Appropriate remedy for 
the aggrieved farmers/growers - Filing of complaint under the 
G 
1065 
H 
1066 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 2 S.C.R. 
A Act or to apply for arbitration for the alleged breach of the 
terms of agreement - Held: An aggrieved farmer/grower is not 
remedied by prosecuting the seller/supplier of the se19ds, 
since he does not get anything even if the sellerlsupplil3r is 
found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment - Thus, the so-
8 called remedy available to an aggrieved farmer/grower to 
lodge a complaint with the Seed Inspector for prosecution of 
the seller/supplier of the seed cannot but be treated as illusory 
and /Je cannot be denied relief under the Consumer Act on 
the ground of availability of an alternative remedy - Remedy 
c of arbitration is not the only remedy available to a grower, 
rather, an optional remedy - He can seek reference to an 
arbitrator or file a complaint under the Act - Language of s.3 
makes it clear that the remedy available in the Act is in 
addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other 
0 law for the time being in force - Arbitration - Alternative 
remedy. 
s. 2(d)(i) -
Government company entered into an 
agreement with selected farmers for growing seeds and the 
company was to purchase the entire crop - Complaint by 
E farmers alleging sale of defective seeds - Whether a grower 
is excluded from the definition of 'consumer' - Held: Evidence 
on record shows that the growers had agreed to produce 
seeds on behalf of the Government company for the purpose 
of earning their livelihood by using their skills and labour -- It 
F cannot be said that the growers had purchased the seeds for 
resale or for any commercial purpose and they are excluded 
from the definition of the term 'consumer' - Since the farmers! 
growers purchased seeds by paying a price to the appellant, 
I 
they would fall within the ambit of s. 2(d)(i) - Remedies 
G available to other consumers of goods and services cannot 
be denied. 
s. 13(1)(c) - Sale of defective seeds to farmers - Award 
of compensation to farmers by District Forums - Procedure 
prescribed uls. 13(1)(c) - Compliance of - Held: Procedure 
H adopted by the District Forum not contrary to s.13(1)(c) -
NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. v. M. 
1067 
MADHUSUDHAN REDDY 
District Forums appointed agricultural experts for ascertaining 
A 
the status of the crops - On basis of the report of experts, the 
District Forums were satisfied that the seeds were defective 
and thus, did not call upon the complainants to provide 
samples of the seeds for getting the same analysed/tested 
in an appropriate laboratory - Further the farmers are illiterate s 
and they have no idea about the Seeds Act and the Rules 
framed thereunder, and the Protection of Plant Varieties and 
Farmers' Rights Act, 2011 that after purchasing the se

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.