DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No: CC/35/2023
Date of Institution: 28.03.2023
Date of Decision: 04.07.2024
Raj Singh son of Sh. Jeet Singh age 55 years old resident of Mehta, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala, Punjab, INDIA.
…Complainant
Versus
1. CSC Kissan Store, Sukhpura Maur, District Barnala through its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Surjit Singh Mann son of Sh. Darshan Singh Mann.
2. Mr. Surjit Singh Mann son of Sh. Darshan Singh Mann resident of Sukhpura Maur, District Barnala CSC Kissan Store, Sukhpura Maur, District Barnala through its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory.
3. PI Industries Ltd. Registered Office : Udaisagar Road, Udaipur, 313001 (Rajashthan) through its Director/Authorized Signatory.
…Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Present: Sh. M.S. Sidhu Adv counsel for complainant.
Sh. H.S. Dhillon Adv counsel for opposite party No. 1.
Quorum.-
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President
2. Smt. Urmila Kumari : Member
3. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg : Member
(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against CSC Kissan Store, Sukhpura Maur, District Barnala through its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Surjit Singh Mann son of Sh. Darshan Singh Mann & others (in short the opposite parties).
2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant is a farmer and is having 10 acres of land and is earning his livelihood from the yield of his agriculture land. It is alleged that the opposite party No. 2 is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of insecticides, pesticides and opposite party No. 1 is engaged in the business of selling insecticides and pesticides manufactured by opposite party No. 3 under the name and style of CSC Kissan Store and the opposite party No. 2 is its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Surjit Singh Mann. It is further alleged that the complainant has sown the crop of wheat and as such the complainant was in need of spray of insecticides/pesticides for Gulli-Danda and the complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 & 2 on 9.9.2022 and they allured the complainant of the insecticides and pesticides namely Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) and assured the complainant that by the spray of this the crop of the complainant will grow to a great extent and will get rid of Gulli-Danda. Upon believing upon the assurance given by the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 27,000/- for his 10 acres of land to opposite parties No. 1 & 2, but they did not issue invoice/bill to the complainant. It is further alleged that the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 arranged for the spray of said Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) in the fields of the complainant measuring approx. 10 acres of land and thereafter, the complainant noticed the deterioration of his crop instead of growth and rid of Gulli-Danda and upon this the complainant immediately visited the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 and requested to help the complainant in getting rid of this but they linger on the matter on the one pretext or the other and did not accede to his requests. Thereafter, the complainant made multiple visits to opposite parties No. 1 & 2 alongwith some respectable persons of his village and requested to look into the matter, but the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 asked the complainant that they will discuss the same with opposite party No. 2 and will provide some solution for the same, but the opposite parties did not redress the grievance of the complainant. The complainant suffered a huge loss as the entire crop of the complainant got damaged, resultantly, loss of Rs. 5 lacs of the complainant. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 13.2.2023 upon the opposite parties which was sent on 14.2.2023 but the opposite parties did not turn up to redress the grievance of the complainant. As such, there is clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.-
- The opposite parties may be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5 lacs alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of purchase of insecticides/pesticides to the complainant.
- To pay Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of compensation for causing mental agony, physical and mental harassment to the complainant.
- Further, to pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 1 appeared and filed written version by taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds that the present complaint is wholly misconceived, groundless and unsustainable in law. The present complaint is baseless and is flagrant abuse of the process of law. The complainant has no locus-standi to file present complaint. The complainant has cone come with clean hands etc.
4. On merits, it is denied that the complainant has sown the crop of wheat or that the complainant was in need of spray of insecticides/pesticides for Gulli-Danda. It is also denied that the complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 on 9.9.2022 or that opposite party No. 1 allured the complainant of the insecticides and pesticides namely Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) or that assured the complainant that by the spray of this the crop of the complainant will grow to a great extent and will get rid of Gulli-Danda. It is further denied that upon believing upon the assurance given by the opposite party No. 1 the complainant purchased Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) from the opposite party No. 1 on 9.9.2022 or that paid an amount of Rs. 27,000/- for his 10 acres of land to opposite party No. 1. It is further denied that opposite party No. 1 arranged for the spray of said Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) in the fields of the complainant measuring approx. 10 acres of land and thereafter, the complainant noticed the deterioration of his crop instead of growth and rid of Gulli-Danda or that upon this the complainant immediately visited the opposite party No. 1 and requested to help the complainant in getting rid of this but they linger on the matter on the one pretext or the other and did not accede to his requests. It is also denied that the complainant suffered a huge loss as the entire crop of the complainant got damaged, or that resultantly loss of Rs. 5 lacs of the complainant. All other allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.
5. It is important to mention here that in the present complaint the notice was sent only to opposite party No. 1.
6. Ld. Counsel for complainant on 31.7.2023 has suffered the statement that I do not want to file any rejoinder on behalf of complainant.
7. The complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1, copy of legal notice Ex.C-2, postal receipts Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-5, reply to legal notice Ex.C-6, copy of newspaper ex.C-7, photographs Ex.C-8 & Ex.C-9, pendrive Ex.C-10, affidavit of Raj Singh Ex.C-11 and closed the evidence.
9. The opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Surjit Singh Ex.O.P1/1 and closed the evidence.
10. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have gone through the file carefully. Written arguments filed by opposite party No. 1.
11. The complainant alleged in the complaint that the complainant is a farmer and is having 10 acres of land and is earning his livelihood from the yield of his agriculture land. The complainant further alleged that the complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 & 2 on 9.9.2022 and they allured the complainant of the insecticides and pesticides namely Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) and assured the complainant that by the spray of this the crop of the complainant will grow to a great extent and will get rid of Gulli-Danda. The complainant further alleged that the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 27,000/- and opposite parties No. 1 & 2 did not issue invoice/bill to the complainant. The complainant further alleged that the complaint spray the said medicine and thereafter the complainant noticed the deterioration of his crop instead of growth and rid of Gulli-Danda and upon this the complainant immediately visited the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 and requested to help the complainant, but all in vain. The complainant alleged that the complainant suffered a huge loss of Rs. 5 lacs as the entire crop of the complainant got damaged. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 13.2.2023 upon the opposite parties which was sent on 14.2.2023 but the opposite parties did not turn up to redress the grievance of the complainant.
12. Upon notice of this complaint the appeared and filed written version and denied that the complainant has sown the crop of wheat or that the complainant was in need of spray of insecticides/pesticides for Gulli-Danda. It is further denied that the complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 on 9.9.2022 for anything. The entire story mentioned in the complaint is denied by the opposite party No. 1.
13. Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant has purchased the insecticide/pesticide namely Bunker (Pendimethalin 30% EC), Awkira (PYROXAXULFONE 85% WG) and due to spay of the above said insecticide/pesticide the crop was damaged and the complainant suffered a loss of Rs. 5 lacs.
14. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for opposite party No. 1 argued that the complainant never visited the opposite party No. 1 for anything. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No. 1 argued that the complainant has not produced any bill. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 1 further argued that the complainant failed to prove that the complainant is having 10 Acres of land.
15. We have gone through the entire evidence and documents produced by the opposite parties. The complainant has not produced any bill vide which it is established that the complainant has purchased the insecticide/pesticide from the opposite party No. 1 as alleged in the complaint. The complainant also failed to produce any document to prove that the complainant owned 10 Acres of land. The complainant produced one Pendrive Ex.C-10 which is the conversation. We have carefully listen the said conversation but from the said conversation it is not proved that from whom the complainant has purchased the said insecticide/pesticide. The complainant also produced the reply to the legal notice Ex.C-6 given by PI Industries Limited in which the PI industry clearly mentioned that our company sells its product through its authorized distributor only whereas Noticee No. 1 & 2 are not authorized to sell our company’s products. It is also proved that the said products were not sold by opposite party No. 1. The complainant also failed to produce any cogent evidence to prove that he has suffered a loss of Rs. 5 lacs by way of any expert evidence.
16. Therefore, we find no merits in the present complaint and the same is accordingly dismissed. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
4th Day of July, 2024
(Ashish Kumar Grover)
President
(Urmila Kumari)
Member
(Navdeep Kumar Garg)
Member
