High Court · 2025

l0.Adakula Srinivas, S/o Mallaiah, Age.50 Years, Occu. Agriculture Rl/o lVondrai village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District AND 1 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UpbhoktaNyayBhawan, 'F' Block, General Pool Office Complex, lNA, New Delhi - 110023 2 lMaharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co, Ltd, Ration Bhavan, 78, Veer Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020, Rep. by its ltrlanager Marketing Service. ..PETITIONERS

3. Ajeet Seeds Ltd, Represented by its Managing Director, Gut No. 233, Chitegaon, Aurangabad - 431 105, l.4aharashtra State Represented by its Manager, Customer Care Centre, Through its Authorized Signatory M, Inidrasena Reddy s/o Bhagawantha Reddy, Regional Vanager, Ajeet Seeds Pvt Ltd, Fl/o - Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lnC a praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, thr: High Court may be pleased to rssue a writ order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to Revision Petition Batch Nos.163 to 172 ol 2025 before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal C.ommission, New Delhi and set-aside the impugned order dt.04.02.2025 passed in Revision Petition Batch Nos.163 lo 172 of 2025 on the file the National Consume' Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MAHADEV ANYARAMBHATLA Counsel for the Respondents: ---- The Court made the following: ORDER ,/ HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA UIRIT PETITION NO.19655 OF 2025 ORDER : (Per llott'ble. Sn./usri.e.4/rh!,rand Ktunrtr Shctu i) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had informed the Court that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order, dated 10.04.2025, passed by this Court in W.P.No.2678 of 2025 and by following the aforesaid order, the present Writ Petition also deserves to be disposed of

2. In view of the said sr-rbmissions, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition also deserves to be disposed of following the aforesaid order, dated 10.04.2025, passed by this Court in W.P.No.2678 of 2025

3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of lollowing the aforesaid order, dated 10.04.2025, passed by this I t 2 Court in W.P.No.267B of 2025. It is made :rear that the the impugned order, dated 04.02 .2025, passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cor,mission, New Delhi in disallowing the condone delay applii:ettions and in dismissing Revision Petition Nos.163 lo 172 o1 2025, is set aside and accordingly, the same is set aside. The National Commission sha11 hear the Revision Petitiors on merits There shal1 be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR @ SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 4 t .Ngllgnqt C^onsumer Disp_utes Redressal Commission, UpbhoktaNyayBhawan, 'F'Block, General Pool Office Comptex, lNA, New Dethi - 110023' The Manager Marketing Service, Maharashtra Hybnd Seeds Co, Ltd, Ration Bhavan. 78, Veer Nariman Road, Ir/lumbai-400020. The lVlanaging .Qi1egtor, Ajeet Seeds Ltd, Gut No. 233 Chitegaon, Aurangaball - 431105, N/aharashtra State, Represented by it5 N/anager, Customer Care Centre, Through its Authorized Signatory ltil, lnidrase"na' Reddy s/o Bhagawantha Reddy, Regional Manag6r, Ale'et Seeds pvt. Ltd, R/o - Hyderabad One CC to Sri Mahadev Anyarambhatla Advocate tOpUCl Two CD Copies TJ GJP (Afong with the Copy of Order dated 10.04.2025 ln W.p.No.2618 ol 2O2Sl \+ t i ,t' I \. \ -;.- \" 'a" 2'l otl 125 :' ) ..1 I \:.. ,.\ 1',,' ,, -: ' ---:/ :rt/ HIGH COURT DATED:0910712025 ORDER WP.No.19655 of 2025 I I DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 4 q& + w,-- :-flq\aD Y*7 THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT.IUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA WRIT PETITION No.2578 OF 2025 ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)l This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief "... to issue a writ order or direction particularly in the uature of Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to Revision Petition Nos.2534 to 2598/2024 before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nerv Delhi ancl set-aside the impugned order dt.14.10.2024 passed in Revision Petltion Nos.2534 to 2598/2024 on the file the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Neiv Delhi and pass sucl-t other orders ..."

2. Heard Sri Mahade'u, Anyarambhatla, Iearned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri K. Venkatesh Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2

3. Vlde irnpugned order, dated 14.10.2024, tlne applications filed by the petitioners seeking to condone the delav in filing the Revision Petitions were disallowed and consequently, the Revision Petition Nos.2534 to 2598 of 2024 were dismissed, by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short, "the National Commission") ) AKS,J & ETD.J \\ P ]io:4,78 of2025

4. Learnecl counsel ior the petitioners had contended that the petitioners are all small tlme farrners and the\ have purchased cotton seeds from rcsl-,ondent No.2 through rlrspondent No.3 Hor,r,eveL, the cotton seecls purchased from responrlcnt No.2 were of defectir.e qualitv and consequentlv, the petitioners have suffered huge loss. ,r\ggrieved by the supplv of de'lcctrve seeds bv responclent Nos.2 and 3, the petitioners hav€- approached the District Consumer Forum, Warangal (for short,'the' District Forum') and filed coml)laints a,idc C.C.No.238 of 2011 arcl batch and the District Forum w.as pleased to allow the cornplaints Preferred bv the petitioners aide orders, dated 08.02.2018, and dirt'cted respondent Nos.2 and 3 to deposit before the District Forum a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- tr.livards crop loss n,ith intc'rest @ , .a't,L per:.11111L1n-l from the date oi iiling of the complaints till the cl.rie oI realisation and to p-ray Rs.20,000/- per acre tolvards the exper-rtiitr-rre incurred bv the petitioners ancl to pav Rs.2,000/ - tor,r'arcls costs

5. Aggrievetl bv the said orders, dated 08.02 -1()18, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have filed F.A.No.267 of 2018 and batch before the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redress.rl Commission, 3 AKS,J & ETD,J W P.No 2678 oi 2025 Hyderabad (for short, 'the State Commission') and the State Commission was pleased to allor.r' the appeals aide order, daled ?0.10.2022. Aggrievecl by the same, the petitioners have approached the National Commission by filing Revision Petition Nos.2534 to 2598 of 2021 along with applications seeking to condone the delay in filing the Revision Petitions. The National Cornmission, aide impugned order, dated L4.L0.2024, was pleased to disallow the condone delay applications and consequently, dismissed the Revision Petitions, rvithout appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioners

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the petitioners were diligent enough in filing the cases before the National Commission. Learned counsel further contended that, initially, the petitioners have entrusted tl-re cases to one Counsel at New Delhi, but he had to move to Kerala due to medical emergency, as his mother was hospitalised during March, 2023. After returning to New Delhi, the said Counsel has shifted his office and there was change in the address of the Counsel at New Delhi. Therefore, there was some miscommunication between the Counsel appearing for .+ ,\KS..] & E1D,J \\' P \r,2t)ts o::025 I. 'l the petitioners before the National Commission r.r..cl the petitioners and as such, delay has occurred in filing the licvision Petitions Therefore, the pctitioners have filed apptications sc.eking to condone the delav in filing the Revision Petitions. Leanred counsel had further contelldecl that the National Commission ought to have hearcl the cases on merits instead of dismissing the condone delay applications and the Revision Petitions. There,fore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition by setting asicle the impugned ordr.r, dated 11.10.2024, and further, dirci:t the National Commission to hear tl.re Revision Petitions on men ts

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for resrrondent t-o.2 had contencled that rro r-letalls rvere furnished b1, the petitioners to conckrne the tlelay. The details of the Cor-r rrscl cngagecl bv the petitioners n'ere also not furnished. Thc.ref r.re, the National Commission was lustified ln clismissing thc condone delay applicartions and the Revision Petitions preferrecl bv tl-re petitioners Therefore, there arre no merits in the Writ Petitiori and the same is liable to be dismissed /' 5 AKS,J & ETD,J W.P.No.2678 of 2O25

8. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, is of the view that the petitioners are all small time farmers and thev lVere diiigent enough IN approaching their Counsel to prefer revision before the National Commission. Hou,ever, the Counsel engaged by the petitioners at New Delhi had to move to Kerala due to medical emergency of his mother and even after returnir-rg to New Delhi, the Counsel has shifted his office. Therefore, there was some miscommunication between the petitioners and their Counsel. Therefore, the National Commission ought to have decided the cases on rnerits instead of disallowing the condone delay applications preferred by the petitioners.

9. In view of the sar-ne, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be rnet, if the impugned order, dated 14.70.2024, passed by the National Commission in disallowing the cor.rdone delay applications and in dismissing Revrsion Petition Nos.2534 to 2598 of 2024, is set aside and accordingly, the same is set aside. TI-re National Commission shall hear the Revision Petitions on merits. 6 AKS J & ETD,J \\' P.No 2678 of 2025 \ t

10. With the above observations/directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Therc shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous applications, if any, pendrtrg in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, I TIRUMALA DEVI EADA,I Date: 10.04 2U25 MD