9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (1) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mers/growers purchased seeds by paying a price to the Appellant, they would certainly fall within the ambit of Section 2(d)(i) of the Consumer Act and there is no reason to deny them the remedies which are available to other consumers of goods and services. there is nothing in the Seeds Act and the Rules which may give an indication that the provisions of the Consumer Act are not available to the farmers who are covered under consumer . As a matter of fact, any attempt to exclude the farmers from the ambit of the Consumer Act by implication will make that Act vulnerable to an attack of unconstitutionality on the ground of discrimination. 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. Therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old/supplied by the Appellant were defective. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forums, Kurnool, Mehboob Nagar, Guntur, Khamman and Kakinada allowed the complaints and awarded compensation to the Respondents. The appeals and the revisions filed by the Appellant were dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'the State Commission') and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission respectively. 3. The Appellant has questioned the orders of the National Commission, which also implies its challenge to the orders of the State Commission and the District Forums mainly on the following grounds: (a) the District Forums did not have the jurisdiction to entertain complaints filed by the Respondents because the issues relating to the quality of seeds are governed by the provisions contained in the Seeds Act, 1966 (for short, 'the Seeds Act') and any complaint about the sale or supply of defective seeds can be filed only under the Seeds Act and not under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Consumer Act'). (b) the District Forums could not have adjudicated upon the complaints filed by the Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riod. It was also claimed that there was no complaint from any other farmer, who had purchased the same variety of seeds. 5.4 By an order dated 1.12.1999 passed in IA No. 141 of 1999, District Forum, Kurnool appointed Shri D.C. Rama Rao, retired Assistant Director of Agriculture as Commissioner and directed him to submit a report after inspecting the field of the Respondents. The Commissioner conducted the inspection and submitted report dated 1.12.1999, the relevant portions of which are extracted below: The sunflower crop is raised under rainfed conditions. The soil is black and suitable for the Sunflower Crop. The cultivation aspects as observed is very satisfactory. The field is clean and free. The variety is said to be KBSJI the crop may be of 80 days above. Flowering is seen but it is not uniform. About 55% of the plants have flowers. About 25% of the plants have the head natured and about 10% of the plants are in the bud stage, while rest of the plants do not have flowers and there is no possibility for these plants to get flower, as they are only 3 feet height and the crop period to give flowers is over. The following are the variation, I have noticed. No. Observed % ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ultivation by asserting that as per Vyavasaya Panchangam of Acharya N.G. Ranga Agriculture University, Hyderabad, 10 to 12 kgs. seeds were required for one hectare but Respondent No. 1 had used substantially less quantity of seeds for his holding of 21.10 acres. 5.6 The Respondents filed their affidavits along with copies of Invoice bill H. No. 000691 dated 11.6.1999, No. 3 Adangal, letter dated 6.11.1999 given to the Appellant, bill dated 29.6.1999 showing the purchase of fertilizers from Chaitanya Chemicals & Fertilizers, Kurnool and the photographs showing the unevenness in the plants. On behalf of the Appellant, an affidavit was filed along with copies of the documents mentioned therein. 5.7 The District Forum rejected the Appellant's objection to the Commissioner's report and held that the complainants (the Respondents herein) have succeeded in proving that the seeds sold to them were defective resulting in loss of crop. Accordingly, the complaint of the Respondents was allowed and the Appellant was directed to pay ₹ 1,00,000/- towards loss of crop and ₹ 10,000/- towards the cost of fertilizer, pesticides, labour etc. with a stipulation that if the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officials of the Appellant, the Respondent contacted the Horticulture Officer, who also inspected the field and submitted a report with the conclusion that the crop had failed because the seeds were defective. The Respondent then filed a complaint under the Consumer Act and prayed for issue of a direction to the Appellant to pay compensation of ₹ 1,38,322/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and compensation of ₹ 1,00,000/- by alleging that he had suffered loss because the foundation seeds supplied by the Appellant were defective. 6.3 In the reply filed on behalf of the Appellant, the following objections were taken to the maintainability of the complaint: (i) that in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement, the only remedy available to the Respondent was to apply for arbitration and the District Forum did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. (ii) that the Respondent had entered into an agreement for commercial production of the seeds and, as such, he cannot be treated as a 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Consumer Act. On merits, it was pleaded that Shri M. v. Narsimha Rao, Seed Officer of NS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Appellant and confirmed the order passed by the District Forum. The National Commission considered the objections raised by the Appellant to the maintainability of the complaint, referred to the judgments of this Court in Fair Air Engineers (P) Ltd. v. N.K. Modi (1996) 6 SCC 385, State of Karnataka v. Vishwabharathi House Building Coop. Society (2003) 2 SCC 412, CCI Chambers Housing Cooperative Society Ltd. v. Development Credit Bank Ltd. (2003) 7 SCC 233 and Indochem Electronic v. Additional Collector of Customs (2006) 3 SCC 721 and held that the complaint filed by the Respondent was maintainable because the jurisdiction of the consumer forums is in addition to other remedies which may be available to him. The National Commission further held that the Respondent is covered by the definition of 'consumer' contained in Section 2(d) of the Consumer Act because he did not purchase the seeds for any commercial purpose. The Appellant's plea that the District Forum could not have awarded compensation to the Respondents without complying with Section 13 of the Consumer Act was negatived by the National Commission by observing that after having used all the seeds for sowi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso manured and applied pesticides as previous. The plants were sown at a distance of 3 feets from each plant. The tomato trees were grown upto 3 to 5 feets height, but no progress in the tomato fruits. The tomato fruits are small just like small bolls. There is no saleable value in the market for the said tomato fruits. The Agrl. Associate Professor Sri P. Seshi Reddy has collected the earth in the field and also trees along with the tomato fruits for testing purpose. On enquiry the Petitioner told regarding the mode of cultivation that he adopted in sowing 'Naru' applying manure and pesticides. The Petitioner complainant told that he was purchasing the tomato seeds from National Seeds Corporation Ltd., Vijayawada since more than 5 years and he sustained heavy loss this year due to non- production of the tomato yield since he supply of with inferior quality of tomato seeds. I conducted Panchanama at the field to that effect on 4.1.1996. Number of villagers gathered and they also opined that the Petitioner complainant has sustained heavy loss this year. He has shown empty tomato seeds packet, which is available with him. Sri P. Sesha Reddy, Associate Professor, Agrl. Colleg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere defective. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner raised another objection that under the Seeds Control Order, 1983, the Divisional Officer, Seeds alone is competent to inspect and report about the causes of failure of the crop. It was submitted that Revision Petition Nos. 131, 135, 136, 137, 140, 142, 143 and 150 of 2003 are liable to be dismissed as the defects cannot be determined without analysis or tests, which the Respondents in these Revision Petitions failed to get done. We find no substance in this submission. The Seeds Control Order, 1983 issued under G.O.M.s No. 97 F&A FP(2) dated 11.02.1985 does not debar any other agency from conducting an enquiry into the causes of failure of crop other than the officers mentioned therein. In the present case, it is at the instance of the District Forum that a Report was got from a Local Commissioner through Dr. P. Sesha Reddy, the expert who inspected the fields of 8 Respondents and not others. The Petitioners had not sent their representatives to the fields of the complainant/respondents in spite of their making representations to that effect. Petitioner failed to take any step on the representations/complaints received from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion Act, 1996 and argued that in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreements 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. An ancillary argument made by the Learned Counsel is that the growers of seeds cannot be treated as 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(d) because they had purchased seeds for commercial purpose. 11. Learned Counsel for the Respondents supported the impugned orders and argued that the District Forums did not commit any illegality by entertaining the complaints filed under the Consumer Act because the Seeds Act and the Rules framed thereunder do not contain any provision for compensating a farmer whose crop is lost or who does not get the expected yield if the seeds sold/supplied by the Appellant are defective. Learned Counsel submitted that the remedy available under the Consumer Act is in addition to other remedies available to a consumer and the complaints filed by the Respondents under that Act cannot be held as barred merely because they could also approach the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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.' 14. Section 2 of the Seeds Act contains definitions of various terms including 'Central Seed Laboratory', 'Certification Agency', 'Committee', 'Seed', 'Seed Analyst', 'Seed Inspector' and 'State Seed Laboratory'. Section 3 casts a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the procedure for submission of the report by the State Seed Laboratory and Central Seed Laboratory. Section 19 specifies the acts which can be punished with an imprisonment upto six months or with fine of ₹ 1,000/- or with both. Section 21 deals with offences by the companies. Sections 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14 and (b), 16, 19, 20 and 21 of the Seeds Act, which have bearing on the decision of the first question raised by the Appellant are reproduced below: 6. Power to specify minimum limits of germination and purity, etc.: The Central Government may, after consulting with the Committee and by notification in the Official Gazette, specify: (a) the minimum limits of germination and purity with respect to any seed of any notified kind or variety; (b) the mark or label to indicate that such seed conforms to the minimum limits of germination and purity specified under Cl.(a) and the particulars which such mark or label may contain. 7. Regulation or sale of seeds of notified kinds or varieties: No person shall, himself or by any other person on his behalf, carry on the business of selling, keeping for sale, offering to sell, bartering or otherwise supplying any seed of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y be prescribed, prefer an appeal to such authority as may be specified by the State Government in this behalf: Provided that the appellate authority may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. (2) On receipt of an appeal under Sub-section (1), the appellate authority shall, after giving the Appellant an opportunity of being heard, dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. (3) Every order of the appellate authority under this section shall be final. 14. Powers of Seed Inspector. - (1) The Seed Inspector may: (a)take samples of any seed of any notified kind or variety from- (i) any person selling such seed; or (ii) any person who is in the course of conveying, delivering or preparing to deliver such seed to a purchaser or a consignee; or (iii) a purchaser or a consignee after delivery of such seed to him; (b) send such sample for analysis to the Seed Analyst for the area within which such sample has been taken 16. Report of Seed Analyst. - (1) The Seed Analyst shall, as soon as may be after the receipt of the sample unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly: Provided that nothing contained in this Sub-section shall render any such person liable to any punishment under this Act if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge and that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Explanation. - For the purpose of this section,- (a) 'company' means any body corporate and includes a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilure of the crop is due to the defective quality of seeds of any notified kind or variety supplied to him, the Seed Inspector shall take in his possession the marks or labels, the seed containers and a sample of unused seeds to the extent possible from the complainant for establishing the source of supply of seeds and shall investigate the causes of the failure of his crop by sending samples of the lot to the Seed Analyst for detailed analysis at the State Seed Testing Laboratory. He shall thereupon submit the report of his findings as soon as possible to the competent authority. (2) In case, the Seed Inspector comes to the conclusion that the failure of the crop is due to the quality of seeds supplied to the farmer being less than the minimum standards notified by the Central Government, he shall launch proceedings against the supplier for contravention of the provisions of the Act or these Rules. 16. An analysis of the above reproduced provisions shows that for achieving the object of regulating the quality of certain seeds to be sold for the purposes of agriculture including horticulture, the legislature has made provisions for specifying the minimum limits of germination an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otally 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 Ors. 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. If found guilty, such person can be imprisoned, but this cannot redeem the loss suffered by the farmer. 18. At this stage, we may notice the background in which the Consumer Act was enacted and its salient features. The General Assembly of the United Nations after extensive discussion and negotiations among Governments and taking into account the interest and needs of consumers in all countries, particularly those in developing countries, adopted the draft guidelines submitted by the Secretary General to the Economic and Social Council (UNESCO) in 1983. The objectives of these guidelines are: (a) To assist countries in achieving or maintaining adequate protection for their population as consumers. (b) To facilitate production and distribution patterns responsive to the needs and desires of consumers. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or (ii) hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first-mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose; Explanation.-For the purposes of Sub-clause (i), 'commercial purpose' does not include use by a consumer of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self-e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er may be necessary, with a view to finding out whether such goods suffer from any defect alleged in the complaint or from any other defect and to report its findings thereon to the District Forum within a period of forty-five days of the receipt of the reference or within such extended period as may be granted by the District Forum; (d) before any sample of the goods is referred to any appropriate laboratory under Clause (c), the District Forum may require the complainant to deposit to the credit of the Forum such fees as may be specified, for payment to the appropriate laboratory for carrying out the necessary analysis or test in relation to the goods in question; (e) the District Forum shall remit the amount deposited to its credit under Clause (d) to the appropriate laboratory to enable it to carry out the analysis or test mentioned in Clause (c) and on receipt of the report from the appropriate laboratory, the District Forum shall forward a copy of the report along with such remarks as the District Forum may feel appropriate to the opposite party; (f) if any of the parties disputes the correctness of the findings of the appropriate laboratory, or disputes the correctness ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 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. To serve the purpose of the Act, various quasi- judicial forums are set up at the district, State and national level with wide range of powers vested in them. These quasi-judicial forums, observing the principles of natural justice, are empowered to give relief of a specific nature and to award, wherever appropriate, compensation to the consumers and to impose penalties for non-compliance with their orders. 23. It can thus be said that in the context of farmers/growers and other consumer of seeds, the Seeds Act is a special legislation insofar as the provisions contained therein ensure that those engaged in agriculture and horticulture get quality seeds and any person who violates the provisions of the Act and/or the Rules is brought before the law and punished. However, there is no provision in that Act and the Rules framed thereunder for compensating the farmers etc. who may suffer adver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) of the definition takes within its fold any person who buys any goods for a consideration paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. It also includes any person who uses the goods though he may not be buyer thereof provided that such use is with the approval of the buyer. The last part of the definition contained in Section 2(d)(i) excludes a person who obtains the goods for resale or for any commercial purpose. By virtue of the explanation which was added w.e.f. 18.6.1993 by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act 50 of 1993, it was clarified that the expression 'commercial purpose' used in Sub-clause (i) does not include use by a consumer of goods bought and used by him for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment. The definition of 'consumer' was interpreted in Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta (supra). The Court referred to the dictionary meanings of the word 'consumer', definition contained in Section 2(d) and proceeded to observe: It is in two parts. The first deals with goods and the other with services. Both parts first declare the meaning of goods and servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of use of defective seeds sold/supplied by the Appellant was to file complaints with the concerned Seed Inspectors for taking action under Sections 19 and/or 21 of the Seeds Act. 28. The consideration of this issue needs to be prefaced with an observation that the grievance of a farmer/grower who has suffered financially due to loss or failure of crop on account of use of defective seeds sold/supplied by the Appellant or by an authorised person is not remedied by prosecuting the seller/supplier of the seeds. Even if such person is found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment, the aggrieved farmer/grower does not get anything. Therefore, the so- called remedy available to an aggrieved farmer/grower to lodge a complaint with the concerned Seed Inspector for prosecution of the seller/supplier of the seed cannot but be treated as illusory and he cannot be denied relief under the Consumer Act on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy. 29. The remedy of arbitration is not the only remedy available to a grower. Rather, it is an optional remedy. He can either seek reference to an arbitrator or file a complaint under the Consumer Act. If the grower opts for the remedy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, in view of the object of the Act and by operation of Section 3 thereof, we are of the considered view that it would be appropriate that these forums created under the Act are at liberty to proceed with the matters in accordance with the provisions of the Act rather than relegating the parties to an arbitration proceedings pursuant to a contract entered into between the parties. The reason is that the Act intends to relieve the consumers of the cumbersome arbitration proceedings or civil action unless the forums on their own and on the peculiar facts and circumstances of a particular case, come to the conclusion that the appropriate forum for adjudication of the disputes would be otherwise those given in the Act. (Emphasis supplied) 30. In Skypay Couriers Limited v. Tata Chemicals Limited (supra) this Court observed: Even if there exists an arbitration clause in an agreement and a complaint is made by the consumer, in relation to a certain deficiency of service, then the existence of an arbitration clause will not be a bar to the entertainment of the complaint by the Redressal Agency, constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, since the remedy provided under the Act is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... commerce; mercantile; having profit as the main aim' (Collins English Dictionary) whereas the word 'commerce' means 'financial transactions especially buying and selling of merchandise, on a large scale' (Concise Oxford Dictionary). The National Commission appears to have been taking a consistent view that where a person purchases goods 'with a view to using such goods for carrying on any activity on a large scale for the purpose of earning profit' he will not be a 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(d)(i) of the Act. Broadly affirming the said view and more particularly with a view to obviate any confusion - the expression 'large scale' is not a very precise expression ' Parliament stepped in and added the explanation to Section 2(d)(i) by Ordinance/Amendment Act, 1993. 33. What needs to be emphasized is that the Appellant had selected a set of farmers in the area for growing seeds on its 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 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iate laboratory. In our view, the procedure adopted by the District Forum was in no way contrary to Section 13 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 of the Consumer Act had not been followed. 35. The issue deserves to be considered from another angle. Majority of the farmers in the country remain illiterate throughout their life because they do not have access to the system of education. They have no idea about the Seeds Act and the Rules framed thereunder and other legislations, like, Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2011. They mainly rely on the information supplied by the Agricultural Department and Government agencies, like the Appellant. Ordinarily, nobody would tell a farmer that after purchasing the seeds for sowing, he should retain a sample thereof so that in the event of loss of crop or less yield on account of defect in the seeds, he may claim compensation from the seller/supplier. In the normal course, a farmer would use the entire quantity of seeds purchased by him for the purpose of sowing and by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... propriate laboratory. In that case, the Respondent had complained that the sunflower seeds purchased by him did not germinate because the same were defective. The complaint was contested by the Appellant on several grounds. The District Forum allowed the complaint and declared that the Respondent was entitled to compensation @ ₹ 2,000/- per acre in addition to the cost of the seeds. The State Commission rejected the objection of the Appellant that the District Forum had not collected the sample of the seeds and sent them for analysis or test for determining the quality. The National Commission summarily dismissed the revision filed by the Appellant. In paragraph 4 of the judgment, this Court extracted the finding recorded by the State Commission for upholding the order of the District Forum and declined to interfere with the award of compensation to the Respondent. The relevant portions of paragraph 4 are reproduced below: Thus, it is clear that it is on the permit granted by the Agricultural Officer that the complainants purchased seeds from the opposite parties and that the same Agricultural Officer visited the land and found that there was no germination. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn by the farmer and observed: There is no doubt in our mind that where complainant alleges a defect in goods which cannot be determined without proper analysis or test of the goods, then, the sample need to be taken and sent to a laboratory for analysis or test. But, the ground reality in the instant case is that reposing faith in the seller, in this case the leading Public Sector Company dealing in seed production and sale, the Petitioner sowed whole of the seed purchased by him. Where was the question of any sample seed to be sent to any laboratory in the case' Whatever the Respondent/Complainant had, was sown. One could have appreciated the bonafides better, if sample from the crop was taken during the visit of Assistant Seed Officer of Petitioner - N.S.C. and sent for analysis. Their failure is unexceptionable. In our view, it is the Petitioner Company which failed to comply with the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. By the time, complainant could be filed even this opportunity had passed. If the Petitioner Company was little more sensitive or alert to the complaint of the Respondent/Complainant, this situation might not have arisen. Petitioner has to pay for his inse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
