By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:
 

The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
 

The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant purchased a cow carrying 9 months from the Opposite Party on 22.8.2009 at the price of Rs.17,000/-. The purchase of the cow was effected in presence of a broker. After calving on 07.9.2009 the cow had given only 5 liters of milk. When the Opposite Party was contacted and informed of the shortage of milk it was assured that the proper yielding of milk will be gradually reached within a period of 20 days. In lactation subsequently the yielding of the milk was not increased and did not reached the quantity as offered by the Opposite Party. Upon the assurance given by the Opposite Party to refund of the price given, the Complainant had given back the cow and calf to the Opposite Party. The Complainant had to spent Rs.2,500/- towards the transportation and brokerage. By the return of cow to the Opposite Party, the Complainant lost the cow and the cost. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to refund the cost of the cow already paid along with compensation of Rs.7,500/- and other expenses towards which the Complainant spent Rs.2,500/-.

2. The Opposite Party filed version in short it is as follows:- The sale of the cow to the Complainant is not admitted. The Opposite Party has not involved in such transaction. The allegation of the Complainant that the Opposite Party received Rs. 17,000/- towards the cost of the cow is absolutely baseless. Regarding quantity of milk in lactation and other things the Opposite Party is fully ignorant. The Opposite Party is a widow living alone. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party with an offer of selling the land property of the Opposite Party in an attractive price. On 22.10.2009 the Complainant again came to the house of Opposite Party along with other brokers and treated the Opposite Party indecently. The Complainant was sent out of the house by the Opposite Party for his indecent behaviour and the indignation resulted by this caused the Complainant to file the complaint against the Opposite Party . The complaint is not maintainable and it is to be dismissed with cost.

3. The points in consideration are:-

1. Is there any unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Relief and cost.

    

4. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consists of oral testimony of PW1 and PW2. The Opposite Party has not filed proof affidavit in this case.

5. Apart from the oral testimony of the witness no other documentary evidence is there in support of the Complainant and Opposite Party. The case of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant along with brokers came to the house of the Opposite party with an offer of selling the land property at an attractive price. It is stated in the version of the Opposite Party that the enmity of the Complainant for sending him out of the house is the reason for making a false complaint against the Opposite Party on the other side. The contention of the Complainant is that the cow was purchased from the Opposite Party on the assurance that in lactation it would give 20 litres of milk. PW2 is the broker who is known to the Opposite Party. The Complainant lives at a distant place from the house of the Opposite Party. Whereas a broker who is examined as PW2 stated that he is engaged in the broker work of cattle sale. Towards the brokerage he was given Rs.250/- from each party. The Opposite Party tendered no oral evidence in this case, apart from filing version nothing is brought out any evidence to support the contention of the Opposite Party to establish the case in support of contention. No reason exists to disbelieve, the contention of the Complainant that the cow was given back to the Opposite Party and the cost is not refunded.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.17,000/- (Rupees Seventeen thousand only) to the Complainant along with an interest at the rate of 10% from the date filing this complaint till the payment of the amount. The Complainant is also entitled for the cost of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One thousand only). The order is to be complied within one month from the date of receiving this.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 30^th January 2010.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

A P P E N D I X

Witnesses for the Complainant:

PW1. Joseph Complainant.

PW2. Noushad. Broker.

Witnesses for the Opposite Party:

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

Nil.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:

Nil.