https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272679 The Supreme Court held the respondent liable for selling defective paddy seeds to the appellant, causing crop loss. The Court reinstated the District Forum's decision, directing the respondent to refund the seed price and compensate for damages. The Court emphasized that the appellant's actions post-discovery did not affect the respondent's liability. The Court invoked the Consumer Protection Act, highlighting its objective to safeguard consumer interests. The ruling underscored the significance of consumer protection and the need for a broad interpretation of relevant laws to uphold consumer rights and promote a fair market economy. en-us Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 May 2018 14:47:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272679 The Supreme Court held the respondent liable for selling defective paddy seeds to the appellant, causing crop loss. The Court reinstated the District Forum's decision, directing the respondent to refund the seed price and compensate for damages. The Court emphasized that the appellant's actions post-discovery did not affect the respondent's liability. The Court invoked the Consumer Protection Act, highlighting its objective to safeguard consumer interests. The ruling underscored the significance of consumer protection and the need for a broad interpretation of relevant laws to uphold consumer rights and promote a fair market economy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272679