Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/419/2015

Danappa M Umanas - Complainant(s)

Versus

Daneshwari Fertilizer Agencies - Opp.Party(s)

V A Shinappagol

29 Feb 2016

ORDER

: ORDER :

The complainant has filed the complaint u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service for non supply of good quality of pesticides for his grapes crops.

The point for consideration is that, whether the complaint is maintainable before this forum?

The complainant has alleging this complaint that he is owns an agriculture land measuring 5 Acres 13 guntas and the opponents the proprietor dealing in selling of pesticides and seeds and that on 30/10/2010 the complainant purchased the pesticides of Z-78 for his grapes crops and the opponents instead of selling pesticide Z-78 to the complainant, but sold XL- Meera-71 which is used for grass. The complainant further alleged that on 1/11/2010 he used the pesticides XL- Meera-71 for his grapes crops grown in 1 Acres 20 Gurntas of his land and on 6/11/2010 he went to his land to see the growth of the crops but he saw that grapes crops are dried and fallen down and immediately with some villagers went to shop of the opponents and demanded the cost of loss of crops and demanded Rs.8 lakhs but the opponents was ready to compromise for Rs.2 lakhs and also that requested the complainant to come back after 4 days but after 4 days the opponents did not keep up the promise and denied to make the payment etc.,

The complainant further alleges that on 22/11/2010 he got issued legal notice through counsel and same is served on 26/11/2010 to the opponent but he did not reply. Hence there is deficiency of service on the part of the opponents.

The complainant has produced the copy of the legal notice, acknowledgement and receipts and the purchase receipt of fertilizers and photo standing in his agriculture land.

On perusal of the complaint cause title the opponents is shown as resident of Bijapur who is running his business of fertilizers and seeds at Bijapur and also on the perusal of the receipts, the receipts is of the shop of the opponent which is situated at Tikota, Tal and Dist. Bijapur. Hence the point arises that whether this forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and that complaint is maintainable before the forum. As per section 11 of Consumer Protection Act of 1986-

Jurisdiction of the District Forum-

1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaint where the value of the goods or services and compensation if any claimed does not exceed Rs.20,00,000/-.

2) The complainant shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction.

(a) A opposite party or each of the opposite parties where there are more than one, at the time of institution of complaint, actually and voluntarily or carries on business……

 

On perusal documents produced by the complainant. Complainant had purchased pesticide from the opponent party who is carrying his business at Bijapur. Hence this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain complaint of the complainant. The complainant failed to prove that this forum has got jurisdiction to try complaint. The complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable.  Hence we pass the following order;

: ORDER :

The complaint is dismissed. The complainant is at liberty to approach proper Forum/Court to redress his grievance.

Member               Member                         President