By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an Order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.25,000/- with 12% interest towards the excess amount received by opposite parties from the complainant at the time of purchase of cow from opposite parties and to pay Rs.50,000/- as cost of the proceedings and Rs.15,000/- as compensation.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant purchased a cow from opposite party No.2, which belongs to HF Category through opposite party No.1, who being the agent on 10.06.2013 for a sum of Rs.34,300/-. The opposite parties promised 8 liters of milk in the morning and 6 liters of milk in the evening. The opposite parties calculated the price by fixing Rs.2,500/- per liter for 14 liters. The opposite party No.1 accepted Rs.500/- towards his commission. The complainant when milched the milk, he received only 3 liters from morning and 2 liters from evening. Altogether he received only 5 liters of milk per day. The complainant when informed this to opposite parties No.1 and 2, they did not cared it and not settled the matter. The complainant then filed complaint before police, but no settlement arrived at. The police entrusted one Sasi to monitor the maintenance of cow and its feeding. Sasi accordingly monitored it and feeded the cow as per the direction of opposite parties. But was there no enhancement of milk is derived. The complainant alleges that the opposite parties No.1 and 2 cheated the complainant by believing him that the cow will give 14 liters of milk per day. So there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties No.1 and 2.
3. On receipt of complaint, notices were issued to opposite parties, opposite party No.1 not appeared before the Forum and opposite party No.1's name is struck off from the case as per the application of the complainant. Opposite party No.2 filed version. Opposite party No.2 contented that no assurance of 14 liters of milk per day is given to the complainant and the price is not calculated as Rs.2,500/- per liter for 14 liters. All other allegations in the complaint are denied by opposite party No.2. There is no cheating or deficiency of service from the part of opposite party No.2. When opposite party No.2 gets 12 liters of milk per day from the cow, opposite party No.2 sold the cow to the complainant for a price of Rs.30,000/-. Opposite party No.2 only came to know about the shortage of milk only, when police intervened in the issue. The shortage of milk is due to the non-caring of cow properly.
4. On going through the complaint, version and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
2. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?.
3. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1. Complainant's witness is examined as PW2. Opposite party No.2 is examined as OPW1 and opposite party No.2's witness is examined as OPW2. In the cross examination of complaint, the complainant deposed that the complainant had seen the cow and its milking before the purchase. More over, the complainant deposed that after purchase, the calf got 'Thadaveekam' decease and thereafter died. On going through the Ext.A1 document ie the pass book showing total liters of milk per day, it is seen that the complainant got nearly 5 liters of milk per day. The opposite party No.2 admitted in the version and in the chief affidavit that he got 12 liters of milk with the cow which is sold to the complainant. The complainant's specific case is that the opposite parties promised the complainant that there will be 14 liters per day. The difference is only 2 liters of milk per day. The shortage of milk from 12 liters to 5 liters may be due to various reasons. The shortage of milk may arise due to difference in the maintenance, death of calf, change of shelter, differences in feeding etc... But when opposite party No.2 admitted 12 liters of milk to the cow before sale, there is a difference of 2 liters which is in shortage. OPW2 also stated that there will be 12 liters of milk per day to the cow. PW2 deposed before the Forum that the opposite party No.2 informed him from the police station that there will be 14 liters of milk per day to the cow which is sold to the complainant. By evaluating all these evidences, the Forum found that there is a shortage of 2 liters of milk per day to the cow. So the value of 2 liters of milk will be Rs.2,500x2=5,000/-. So the Forum is of the opinion that there is unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party No.2 by giving false promise to the complainant and thereby getting more amount from the complainant. So Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since Point No.1 is found against the opposite party No.2, Opposite party No.2 is liable to pay cost and compensation to the complainant.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party No.2 is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the complainant being the excess amount received from the complainant and to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party No.2 shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest for the whole sum thereafter.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25th day of November 2014.
Date of Filing:09.09.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Pathumma. Complainant.
PW2. Sasikumar. Clerk cum Milk collector, Tholpetty K.S.S.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
OPW1. Shaji John. Agriculture.
OPW2. Abdu. Broker.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Pass book.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
