BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION :HYDERABAD
F.A.No.967/2007 against C.D.No.61/2006, Dist. Forum, Srikakulam .
Between:
.1. The G.M.R.Industries Ltd.,
Rep. by its General Manager
(Cane) Sugar Division , Varalakshmi Sugars,
Sankili Village & PO, Palakonda Mandal,
Srikakulam District.
2.V.Suribabu, Cane Devp. Officer,
Varalakshmi Sugars, Kummaripeta Village,
Gara Post & Mandal,
Srikakulam District. … Appellants/
Opp.parties
And
Badagala Sayanna , S/o.Surappadu, Hindu,
Aged 60 years, Retd. Employee & cultivation,
R/o.Jalluvalasa Village, Gara Mandal,
Srikakulam District. … Respondent/
Complainant
Counsel for the Appellants : M/s.K.S.Gopala Krishnan
Counsel for the Respondents : M/s. K.Venkat Rao
CORAM:HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,
AND
SMT. M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE MEMBER,
TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST,
TWO THOUSAND TEN.
Oral Order :(Per Smt. M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Member)
****
Aggrieved by the order in C.D.No.61/2006 on the file of District Forum, Srikakulam, opposite parties preferred this appeal.
The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the opp.parties motivated the complainant to cultivate sugar cane in his wet lands and also assured that they will take the sugar cane in the month of December every year and will pay the value of the same immediately by remitting the amount into the complainant’s bank account. Motivated by the assurance of the opp.parties, the complainant planted the sugar cane in his wet land in an extent of Ac.2 cents in Jalluvalasa Village and the opp.parteis issued Ryothvari Pass Book no.C.L.No.53659. The complainant submits that opp.parties did not take proper steps for cutting the sugar cane in the month of December, 2002-2003 and after several requests the opp.parties have taken the sugar cane crop in the month of March, and paid Rs.65,000/- after a lapse of 6 months time. The complainant submits in the year 2003-2004 also the opp.parties did not take steps to cut the sugar cane in the month of December and with an ulterior motive to cause loss to the complainant ordered cutting of crop in the month of March due to which the sugar cane lost weight and was spoilt by the animals. After several requests made by the complainant, opp.party no.2 issued a letter dt.22.6.2005 to the complainant addressed to AMC for payment of the sugar cane amount after deducting Rs.500/-, but opp.party no.1 did not pay the amount. Opp.parties did not release the payment of the complainant, but on 9.12.2005 deposited an amount of Rs.11,533/- by way of cash in ABJ 2848 account of the complainant. Alleging deficiency in service, the complainant approached District Forum to direct the opp.parties to pay the value of sugar cane amount for the year 2003-2004 Rs.1 lakh on deducting amount of Rs.11,533/- which is already paid by the complainant, to pay Rs.1 lakh towards financial loss for non payment of sugar cane amount in time to pay 36% interest from the date of taking sugar cane till the date of payment and to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- and to pay Rs.1000/- towards advocate’s fee.
Opposite party no.1 filed counter which was adopted by opp.party no.2. The opp.party submits that the complainant has given his offer under Form no.2 wherein some particulars have been mentioned and an agreement has also been executed in favour of opp.party by the complainant under Form no.3 and the complainant has not furnished the bank account. The complainant submitted form no.2 in the office of opp.party no.1 and did not contact personally and also has not furnished the bank account for which the amount of sugar cane is to be deposited. Opp.party no.2 expressed his willingness that he will cut the sugar cane in the presence of the complainant and transport the same to the premises of the sugar factory and cutting and carrying charges if met by the complainant, he will reimburse the charges for which the complainant did not give any response and hence opp.party no.2 got the sugar cane crop cut carefully and transferred to the premises of sugar factory and deposited an amount of Rs.11,533/- on 9.12.2005 in the complainant’s account which was withdrawn by the complainant without any protest. Opp.party submits that there is no deficiency in service on their behalf and seeks for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
The District Forum based on the evidence adduced i.e. Exs.A1 to A5 and B1 to B3 and pleadings put forward directed the opp. parties to pay Rs.88,467/- towards the balance of the sugar cane crop of the complainant for the year 2003-2004 together with interest at 9% p.a. from 2.3.2006 till the date of realization, Rs.2000/- towards compensation and Rs.1000/- towards litigation expenses including the advocate’s fee of Rs.500/-.
The learned counsel for the appellants/opp.parties contended that as per the provisions of A.P.Sugar Cane Act and Ex.B2 which is an agreement entered into between both the parties this Forum has no jurisdiction. Taking into consideration that there is consideration paid and service offered, the complainant herein falls within the definition of ‘Consumer’ as per the C.P.Act.
The facts not in dispute are that the complainant planted sugar cane crop in his wet land of two acres and the opp.parties issued a pass book bearing no.G.L.53659 and also executed agreement vide Ex.B1 and vide Ex.B2 another agreement was executed by the complainant and opp.parties 1 and 2. The main case of the complainant is that the opp.parties did not take steps to cut the sugarcane crop in time in the month of December,2004 and after several requests the opp.parties issued cutting instructions for the crop in the month of March,2005 and even after cutting of sugarcane the opp.parties did not pay the value of the crop immediately as per the terms of the agreement. Opp.party no.2 issued a letter of AMC for payment of sugar cane amount but opp.party no.1 did not arrange for payment and the complainant got issued a legal notice Ex.A4 dt. 28.11.2005 and the opp.parties replied vide Ex.A5 dt. 12.12.2005. After receipt of the legal notice, opp.parties deposited an amount of Rs.11,533/- on 9.12.2005 by way of cash in the complainant’s account. Ex.A3 evidences that after several requests made by the complainant, opp.party no.2 wrote a letter to opp.party no.1 to settle the payment of the complainant except for Rs.500/- towards labour and transport charges. We observe from the record that it is only after issuance of legal notice dt.28.11.2005, the opp.parties deposited an amount of Rs.11,533/-. As per Ex.B1 clause 5 of the agreement if opposite party no.1 has not received the crop and the complainant is ready to handover the crop, opp.party no.1 is to pay the original amount of the crop with interest at 9% p.a. and the District Forum observed that the opp.parties are liable to pay Rs.88,467/- towards remaining balance of the amount of sugarcane crop with interest at 9% p.a.
As per Ex.B1 Clause 2 the farmer should supply good sugarcane of acceptable quality and it is the case of the appellants/opp.parties that cutting order was given in the month of January but supply was made in the month of May, 2004. Though the complainant does not deny that he raised the crop at the instance of
the opposite parties and supplied 14 metric tons as per Ex.A3 he only received a meager payment of Rs.11,533/- in the month of December,2005. The complainant also denies that any cutting order was given and he says that it is only a computer print out without any signature. Taking into consideration the afore mentioned facts we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on behalf of the appellants/opp.parties and we find no reason to interfere with the well considered order of the District Forum.
In the result this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. Order of the District Forum is confirmed. Time for compliance four weeks.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
MEMBER
Dt.31.8.2010.
Pm*
