West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/121/2022

Tinkari Chattaraj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bokharia Ice & Cold Storage, Prop: Nirmal Kumar Bokaria - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjit Kr Acharya

22 Sep 2023

ORDER

Shri Sudip Majumder- President-in-Charge.

                The complainant/petitioner files this case U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The fact of the case in brief is that one Tinkari Chattaraj, S.O. Late Anilbarman Chattaraj, permanent resident of Vill. Kundala P.O. Kundala, P.S. Mayureswar, District-Birbhum, is a cultivator. The complainant kept 100 packets of potato containing 50 kg. per packet in the cold storage of the OP subject to payment of rent of Rs. 90.25/- per packet for cultivating potato in 9 bighas of his agricultural land.

            It is the further case of the complainant that on 07/11/2022 the complainant had been to the cold storage to get the potatoes from the cold storage for preparation of seed, but on 11/11/2022 the packets were brought and it was seen that most of the potatoes had already been germinated and rotten due to mal preservation by the authority. Besides seedlings were found on the potatoes.

             It is the next case of the complainant that he informed the Mayureswar P.S. of the fact and also other authorities such as the ADO Mayureswar-II, the district Agricultural marketing officer Suri, Birbhum, the BDO Mayureswar-II of the aforesaid matter and requested them to do the needful. That a meeting was held between the cultivators and the proprietor of Bokharia Ice and Cold Storage with intervention of Mayureswar P.S. That an agreement was made between the cultivators and Bokharia Ice & Cold Storage following discussion amongst them.

 

The agreement was made on some terms and conditions out of these one was :-

1. That if the ready quantity of potato with cut piece comes to 80 packets out of 100 packets, no compensation will be given. Be it mentioned here this conditions will be applicable on the highbred potato i.e. 20% will be deducted on 100 packets highbred potato.
2. That if the ready quantity of potato with cut piece comes to 85 packets out of 100 packets, no compensation will be given in the Jyoti potato. Be it mentioned here this conditions

will be applicable on the Jyoti potato i.e. 15% will be deducted on 100 packets Jyoti potato.

3. That after assessing the damage and spoilt potato from 10 packets to 99 packets the rate of potato will be assessed and thereafter compensation will be given as per rate of bond.
4. No shed rent will be free in case shed is booked by the cultivators after making payment in advance. But in case of the bond is on the account of businessman labour cost; shed rent; will be given.
5. After 7^th October on 100 packets highbred and Jyoti potato the deduction will be 20+2=22%+15+2=17%.

It is the specific case of the complainant that the District Agricultural Marking officer intervened into the matter after written representation from the complainant and also complaint from the other agriculturist about the damage of potatoes and a meeting was held amongst the agriculturists including the complainant, the cold storage owner and District Agricultural Marking officer, but after meeting no fruitful formula has been come out.

            Hence, after finding no other alternative the complainant is compelled to file this complaint before this Forum/Commission for proper relief and prays for:

1. To pass an order directing the OP to pay compensation for the potatoes of 100 packets @ Rs. 700/- per packet.
2. To pass an order directing the OP to pay compensation Rs. 9,00,000/- for depriving the complainant of potato cultivation.
3. To pass an order directing the OP to pay further compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment.
4. To pass an order directing the OP to pay Rs. 20,000/- as litigation cost.
5. Other relief or reliefs.

 

It appears from case record that none appears from OP before this District Commission after receiving the notice. OP has not taken any step. No written version has yet been filed by the OP.  As a result, vide order No. 09 dated 29/05/2023 this Commission stated for running of the instant case exparte against the OPs.

Complainant’s side submitted evidence-in-chief and written notes on argument. Some documents have also been filed by the complainant himself compared with original documents. Thereafter, Ld. Advocate for the complainant made oral argument in support of his case.

Points for determination/Issues

1.  Whether the complainant is a consumer as per definition of the term ‘Consumer’ of the C.P Act. ?
2. Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try this case?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?

 

Decision with reasons

Point No. 1:

            In this case, the complainant hired cold storage of the OP to store potatoes on payment of proper rent. Thus the complainant is a consumer under the OP and OP is the service provider. Hence, the complainant is a consumer as per Sec. 2(7)d(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Point No. 2:

            In this case, the cause of action arose on and from 07/10/2022 and the case has been filed on 29/12/2022 and as such it can be said that the complainant has been filed this case within the statutory period of the C.P. Act, 2019 and as such the instant complaint is not barred U/S 69(1) of the C.P. Act, 2019.

            Pecuniary Jurisdiction of this District Commission as per Notification No. G.S.R. 892(E). dated 20^th December, 2022 by Consumer Affairs Department, Govt. of India, New Delhi is Rs. 50 lakh.

            That the complainant is a resident of Vill. Kundala P.O. Kundala, P.S. Mayureswar, Dist. Birbhum, Pin-731234 which is under the Territorial Jurisdiction of this District Commission as per Sec. 34(2) of C.P. Act, 2019.

            Hence, this Commission has Pecuniary Jurisdiction as well as Territorial Jurisdiction.

 

 

Point No. 3:

It appears from the documentary evidence as available in the case record that the complainant kept 100 packets of potato in the cold storage of the OP for preservation. On 07/11/2022 the complainant had been there to get the potatoes from the cold storage for preparation and it was seen that most of the potatoes had already been germinated and rotten due to mal preservation by the authority. Besides seedlings were found on the potatoes. Thus, it was not fit for cultivation of potato.

In the instant case premature seedlings were grown due to the reason that potatoes had not been preserved scientifically in the cold storage and the germination had not been done scientifically. That due to premature germination seedlings in potatoes were grown out in the cold storage cannot be used as potato seed for cultivation in the normal temperature. That the potatoes have been damaged due to the negligent act of the cold storage authority for not preserving the potatoes scientifically.  

Thus it is proved beyond all reasonable doubt that there is/was deficiency in service as per Sec. 2(11) of the C.P. Act, 2019 as well as unfair trade practice as per Sec. 2(47) of C.P. Act, 2019 on the part of the OP.

Hence, from the above discussion it is proved that the complainant could be able to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt.

Point No. 4:

            In the instant case, the potatoes which were kept in the cold storage was not preserved properly and as such without scientific germination the seedling was come out, besides that , most of the potatoes

were rotten. Thus, the act of the OP, amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant suffered consequential loss due to the reason that he was deprived of potato cultivation in his 9 bighas of cultivable land.

            As per terms and conditions of the agreement between the cultivators and OP/Bokharia Ice & Cold Storage dated 03/08/2022, the OP is liable to compensate for the loss of potato at the erstwhile rate on that date. Be it mentioned here that on that date the price of potato per packet was Rs. 700/-.

            Therefore, as per the said agreement the OP is liable to compensate the complainant

            = 80% of the 100 packets potato × Rs. 700/-

            = 80 packets potato × Rs. 700/-

            = Rs. 56,000/-

           

 

In addition to this, the complainant is entitled to get compensation Rs. 1,00,000/- as against consequential loss due to his deprivation of  potato cultivation in his 9 bighas of cultivatable land. Further the complainant is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 20,000/- as against mental agony and harassment.

Hence, it is,

            O R D E R E D,

                                        that the instant C.F. Case No. 121/2022 be and same is allowed exparte against the OP with cost.

The OP/Bokharia Ice & Cold Storage is directed to pay Rs. (56,000/- + 1,00,000/-)

= 1,56,000/- (One lakh fifty six thousand only) to the complainant/petitioner and

Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty thousand only) as against mental agony and harassment to the complainant and Rs. 5000/- (Five thousand only) as cost of litigation to the complainant.

The entire decree will be complied by the OP within 45 (Forty five) days from this date of order, in default the complainant  would be entitled to get interest on entire decretal amount @ 9% p.a. calculating on and from the date of default till realization.

If the OP failed to comply the decree the complainant would be at liberty to put this order to execution in accordance with law.

The instant case is thus disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given/handed over to the parties to this case free of cost.