Found At Fault Horticulture Department, Private Firm Directed By Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Baramulla To Pay Nearly ₹4 Lac To Aggrieved Farmer Duo

Alfaaz – The Words Exclusive

Srinagar: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Baramulla on Monday implicated Horticulture Department and a private firm for causing monetary loss and mental agony to two farmers from Sopore and directed the parties at fault to pay the aggrieved duo compensation in tune of nearly four lac rupees.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Baramulla/Bandipora, while disposing off the complaint remarked in its order that the complaint in hand has been filed by the complainants before this Commission on 26-04-2023, seeking direction to the O.P No.1 to liquidate excessive amount taken from the complainants to the tune of Rs.1,66,301/- along with interest taken on account of implementation of modified High Density Plantation scheme and further direction to pay an amount of Rs.3 lacs as compensation for causing monetary loss and mental agony.

Detailing out the facts of the case, the Coram led by Peerzada Qousar Hussain, with Nyla Yaseen as member, as per the order said, that, the complainants are the residents of UT of J&K hailing from village Saripara Buddan, District Baramulla.

The contents of the complainants, the facts read, are that the department of Horticulture in collaboration with NAFED (National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd.) launched a scheme for implementation of modified High Density Plantation scheme for various fruit trees viz Apple, Walnut, Almond and Cherry etc. “The said scheme was devised under the concurrence of the Finance department. The complainants applied for availing the facility for the said plantation which was however allowed by the O.P No.2 department by issuance of selected/short listed Companies established for Block Rohama, Baramulla. The complainants further contended that they chose the Company viz a viz M/S H.N. Agri serve Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as O.P No.1 in the complaint, for plantation in accordance with the scheme.”

“The complainants further contended that they executed an agreement with O.P No.1 in the month of March, 2022, consequent upon which the complainants paid an amount of Rs.3,51,301/- to the O.P No.1 in three installments for executing the plantation but despite receiving the payments from the complainants, the plantation was not done. The complainants further contended that because of non-plantation of the plants, as agreed to by the O.P No.1, the complainants suffered huge monetary loss and mental agony. Pertinent to mention here, that the complainants were charged excessive amount for plantation for the land which they had earmarked, measuring 3 kanals and 10 marlas situated at Chijhama, Rafiabad, Baramulla for plantation after cutting down number of fruit trees to make the said land available to the O.P No.1 for plantation,” reads the facts of the case.

“The complainant approached the O.P No.1 so many times but no plantation was done despite fulfilling the requisite terms and conditions of the agreement, instead they resorted to delaying tactics, however, after constant persuasion of the complainants, the plantation was done by the O.P No.1 on 25-08-2022”, read the facts of the case.

“The complainants have further contended that the O.P No.1 in accordance with the prescribed norms of the scheme and the agreement as well, was supposed to execute the plantation on the earmarked land of the complainants way back in March-April 2021 but the O.P No.1 delayed it for 9 months due to which the complainants suffered huge loss, besides they spent over Rs.1,50,000/- for preparation of the land in question for plantation. The contention of the complainants is further that the O.P No.1 in accordance with the agreement was supposed to install the machinery equipment on four components over the supra earmarked land of the complainants but they installed only three components. It is the further contention of the complainants that, in accordance with the Horticulture scheme, only Rs.53,000/- was to be paid by the complainants for three components per kanal, thereby the complainants were supposed to pay total amount of Rs.1,85,000/- for three kanals and 10 marlas of land, contrary to which the O.P No.1 has charged an amount of Rs.3,51,301/- deceitfully which is excessive. The excessive amount charged by the O.P No.1 has caused the complainants monetary loss as they have paid an excessive amount of Rs.1,65,801/-.”

“The complainants have further averred that the aforesaid company planted 548 plants, out of which 438 sprouted and the remaining 110 remained un-sprouted which got wasted due to the delay of plantation as the Company herein referred to as O.P No. 1 was supposed to provide the Motor facility to the complainants as per the scheme but they were not provided the said Motor facility for plantation,” the complainants maintained.

“Per contra, the O.P No. 2 & 3 filed their w/v through an Official namely Parvaiz Ahmad Najjar, Senior Assistant, annexed with the relevant documents, perusal of which reveals that the complainants had undoubtedly applied for plantation through the O.P’s department and after fulfilling the formalities required by the department, they chose the Company viz a viz M/S H.N.Agri amongst the short listed Companies provided by the concerned department. It also emerges that the District Horticulture Officer, Baramulla herein referred to as O.P No.2 has served a legal notice to O.P No.1 whereunder it is mentioned that the said O.P No.1 despite receiving the amount from the farmers, has not been able to execute the plantation and even didn’t install the drip irrigation due to which the beneficiaries suffered huge loss.”

“The complainants adduced three witnesses in support of their claim by way of Witness Affidavits, namely Waseem Rashid Malik S/o Abdul Rashid Malik R/o Saripara Budan, Rafiabad, Mir Intikhab S/o Shams-ud-din Mir R/o Dewanbagh, Baramulla and Khursheed Ahmed Malik S/o Abdul Samad Malik R/o Saripara Budan, Rafiabad, Baramulla, the complainant No.1 as witness in his own case,” read the facts of the case.
“The witnesses No. 1&2 have stated in the affidavits that they are related to the complainants and It is a fact that the complainants applied for a scheme launched by the department of Agriculture for implementation of modified High Density plantation of different kinds of fruit trees. They chose the Company M/S H.N. Agri serve Pvt. Ltd. and executed the agreement with the said company, thereafter the complainants paid an amount of Rs.3,51,301/- but the plantation was not done within the prescribed timeline, despite the fact that the complainants earmarked the required land for plantation.”

“Furthermore, the said company avoided the plantation and there was a delay of 9 months which caused the complainants huge loss and the O.P No.1 also charged the excessive amount to the complainants. Khursheed Ahmad Malik, the complainant as witness in his own case, has stated in the affidavit that he is a resident of Saripara Budan. The affidavit further reads that the department of Horticulture in collaboration with NAFED, launched a scheme for implementation of modified High Density plantation scheme of different fruit trees. Consequently, he along with his brother submitted the requisite Form to the department of Horticulture which was accepted/allowed by the said department. Thereafter, the department issued a list of selected/short listed Companies for the purpose and the complainants accordingly chose M/S H.N. Agri serve Company for the same. They entered into an agreement in the month of March, 2022 and accordingly an amount of Rs.3,51,301/- was paid to the said company in three installments, but the plantation was not done by the said company. The witness has further stated in the affidavit that they suffered huge loss due to Non plantation despite earmarking the land of 3 kanals and 10 marlas. Besides, no machinery was installed by the said company, however, after continuous persuasion of the complainants, the plantation was done in the month of August, 2022, as such there was a delay of 9 months due to which 25% of the plants remained unsprouted which caused them huge loss. The said company even charged an excessive amount of Rs.1,65,801/- from the complainants deceitful,” as per the contention of the complainants.

The Coram remarked that since perusal of the records placed on file reveals that the Govt. of J&K through the Horticulture department launched a scheme for implementation of High Density plantation of various fruit trees in terms of Govt. Order No.21-JK(Horti) of 2021, dated 22-03-2021, consequent upon which a list of selected/shortlisted companies was prepared for the Block Rohama, Baramulla for implementation of the above scheme. The complainants accordingly chose the proprietor M/S H.N. Agri Serve Pvt. Ltd. for plantation and subsequently executed an agreement in the month of March 2022.

“The complainants in accordance with the executed agreement paid the first installment to the O.P No.1 to the tune of Rs.1,08,000/- on 17-11-2021, second installment to the tune of Rs.1,98,000/- plus Rs.5,000/- on 19-03-2022 and the third installment of Rs.40,301/-on 17-08-2022, thereby the complainants paid a total amount of Rs.3,51,301/- to the O.P No.1. However, the said O.P No.1 after receiving the amount of Rs.3,51,301/- was supposed to execute the plantation which was however executed on the earmarked land of the complainants on 25-08-2022 after a considerable lapse of time.”

“Despite the fact that the complainants earmarked a land of 3 kanal 10 marlas for plantation, the O.P No.1 delayed the matter which has caused huge loss to the complainants as 25% of the plants after the plantation remained unsprouted. Besides, the O.P No.1 was under bounden duty to install the necessary equipments over the earmarked land, pertinently only three components have been installed on the land in question. Furthermore as per the prescribed scheme of the concerned department, an amount of Rs.53,000/- per kanal was to be charged to the complainants for three components which amounts to Rs.1,85,000/-, however, the O.P No.1 has charged an amount of Rs.3,51,301/- instead of Rs.1,85,000/- which is excess to the amount which was to be charged for plantation scheme in accordance with the prescribed norms of the concerned department. It is crystal clear that the rates for plantation have been charged significantly higher by the aforesaid company, herein referred to as O.P No.1 which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, in accordance with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. We have gone through the records placed on the file and the statements of the witnesses and are of the considered view that the O.P No.1 has failed to execute the policy in accordance with the prescribed norms of the concerned department within the stipulated period of time, besides the said O.P No.1 has charged excessive amount to the complainants which amounts to unfair trade practice.”

Adjudicating the matter, the Coram said that in view of the facts and relying on the documents placed on record, the complaint of the complainants is allowed and disposed with the directions that O.P Number 1 is directed to repay the excessive amount of Rs.1,66,301/-(One lac sixty- six thousand three hundred one rupees only) to the complainants within a period of 6 weeks.

The Coram directed the opposite to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees two lacs only) jointly and severally to the complainants as compensation for the loss and mental agony caused due to the non-plantation, within a period of 6 weeks, failing which the amount shall carry the interest @8% from the date of Order till its realization.

The O.Ps, the Coram said, are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 20,000/-(Twenty thousand rupees only) to the complainants as litigation charges.