Punjab

Faridkot

CC/14/183

Gurmail Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dhiman Wali Cooperative - Opp.Party(s)

Jagdeep Singh

25 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :       183

Date of Institution:   24.12.2014

Date of Decision :    25.08.2015

 

Gurmail Singh s/o Sh Bhag Singh r/o Village Dhiman Wali, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

1. The Dhiman Wali Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd, Dhiman Wali through its Secretary.

2. The Dhiman Wali Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd, Dhiman Wali through its President.

3. The Dhiman Wali Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd, Dhiman Wali through its Salesman.

4. Inspector, The Dhiman Wali Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd, Dhiman Wali, Faridkot. (given up by complainant on 2.03.2015)

5. Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Faridkot.

6. Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Faridkot.

7. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh.

                               ....Opposite parties (Ops)

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:     Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

Sh P Singla, Member.

 

Present:      Sh Jagdeep Singh Jatana, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                  Sh D S Dhaliwal, Ld Counsel for OPs-1 to 3, 5 and 6,

         OP-7 Exparte.

 (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                        Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops seeking directions to OPs to give urea fertilizer etc and to pay Rs 4,00,000/- for financial loss, compensation  and for mental agony and litigation expenses.

2                                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant is the member of OP-1 with Account No. 152/374 and he owns 10 acres of agricultural land and his son Kuldip Singh also possesses 10 acres of land at Dhiman Wali. It is contended that complainant paid a sum of Rs 1,73,975/- + Rs 6,325/- as interest to OP-1 on 28.11.2014 in his aforementioned account and as per rules and regulations of OPs, any member of the OP can get fertilizer, oil, cash payment, grocery items etc to the extent deposited by concerned member with OP-1. It is further contended that Society can give urea fertilizer, oil to the tune of Rs 20,800/- per acre after every six months and it is a revolving limit. OP-1 gave Rs 1,10,000/-in cash, diesel wroth Rs 25,000/-, urea fertilizer 3 bags per acre only to the complainant. Ld Counsel for complainant alleged that any person can get more urea if he so desires, but complainant was not given fertilizer fully and there is balance of complainant towards OP-1 and due to non supply of full fertilizer etc by OP-1, complainant has suffered huge loss to the tune of Rs 4,00,000/-i.e loss of wheat crop to the tune of Rs 2,40,000/-, loss of tori to the amount of Rs 1,00,000/- and Rs 60,000/-for harassment, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops. Complainant has prayed for seeking directions to OPs to pay compensation and litigation expenses besides main relief. Hence, the complaint.

3                                            The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 30.12.2014, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                                 On receipt of notice, OPs-1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 appeared in Forum through Counsel and filed reply taking preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. It is further asserted that complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and complainant has not suffered any loss, rather filed this complaint with malafide intention to extract money from the Society in the garb of damages. However, on merits, OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong,  incorrect and false and asserted that Op-1 gave 1,10,000/- in cash and diesel worth Rs 25,000/- and 3 bags of urea fertilizer per acre only. Counsel for Ops brought before the Forum that on 1.12.2014, Kuldip Singh s/o Gurmail Singh purchased 32 bags of N P K Fertilizer for sowing wheat crop. On 5.12.2014, complainant sent his son Kuldip Singh to purchase 20 bags of urea from OP-1 from the account of complainant and OP-1 supplied 15 bags of urea to him and payment was made from the account of complainant. It is averred that there was shortage of urea throughout the country and urea was supplied to the members of OP-1 as per availability of supply and demand and due to shortage of supply, only 15 bags of urea were given to complainant against demand of 20 bags. It is further averred that urea fertilizer was distributed by the official of OP-1 in the presence of Members of Managing Committee of OP-1 as per ratio of demand and supply keeping in view the shortage of urea. After 5.12.2014, complainant never approached OP-1 to get more urea. It is asserted that during the rabi crop of year 2013-14, complainant did not purchase any fertilizer from OP-1 and purchased it from market and due to shortage of urea in the market, complainant demanded urea from OP-1 and on getting 5 bags less than his demand, he has filed the present complaint only to blackmail OPs. On receiving more supply of urea, OPs supplied urea to other members of the OP-1 after 5.12.2014, but complainant did not come to purchase the same. It is further asserted that complainant never came to OPs after 5.12.2014 for obtaining urea and thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs and complainant has not suffered any financial loss as rabi crop is not yet ready for harvesting and conduct of OPs have not caused any harassment or mental tension to complainant. All the other allegations and allegation with regard to relief sought too were refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with special costs.

                            Ld Counsel for complainant vide his statement dt 2.03.2015 got recorded before the Forum gave up OP-4. Notice was also issued to OP-7, but despite service of summons no body appeared on behalf of OP-7 either in person or through counsel and therefore, after waiting for a long time, OP-7 was proceeded against exparte vide detailed order dt 2.03.2015.

5                                       Parties were given proper opportunities to prove their respective case. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex C-2 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                     In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, ld Counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Gurdarshan Singh as Ex OP-1/1 and documents Ex OP-2 to 6  and then, closed the evidence on behalf of Op-1,2,3, 5 and 6.

7                                                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file.

 8                                                       The Ld Counsel for complainant vehemently argued that complainant is a member of OP-1 Society. He owns 10 acres of agriculture land and his son Kuldeep Singh also owns 10 acres of agriculture land at village Dhiman Wali. There is a relationship of customer and Service Provider that exists between complainant and OPs. As per rules and regulations of OPs, any member of the OP-1 can get fertilizers, urea, oil, cash and grocery items etc from the society to the tune of Rs 20,800/- per acre after every six months and it is a revolving limit. In the Rabi season 2014-15, OP-1 has given Rs 1,10,000/-in cash, diesel worth Rs 25,000/- and 3 bags of urea per acre only to the complainant. If any member desires, he can get more urea from the society but OPs did not give more urea to complainant as per his demand and due to non supply of urea by OP-1 to complainant, the complainant suffered huge loss to his wheat crop. Complainant requested Ops many times to give fertilizers but all in vain. This act of OPs has caused harassment and mental tension to the complainant and also caused financial loss to the complainant. The complainant is entitled to recover Rs 4 lacs as compensation from OPs and has prayed for accepting the present complaint.

9                                                        In reply to the arguments of complainant, ld counsel for OPs argued that present complaint is not maintainable. The complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and complainant has not suffered any loss but has filed the complaint with malafide intention to extract money from the OPs. The complainant is not the consumer of OPs and no relationship of customer and Service Provider exists between them. However, it is admitted that every member of the Society can get cash, diesel, fertilizers and other items from the society to the tune of Rs 20,800/-per acre on every crop which is to be settled after harvesting of the crop. In the Rabi season 2014, OP-1 gave Rs 1,10,000/-in cash, diesel worth Rs 25,000/- and three bags of urea per acre to complainant. Complainant did not suffer any loss due to non supply of urea by OP-1. On 1.12.2014 Kuldeep Singh son of complainant purchased 32 bags of NPK fertilizers, which is used at the time of sowing of wheat crop. On 5.12.2014, complainant made demand through his son for 20 bags of urea from OP-1 from his account. On it, OP-1 supplied 15 bags of urea to the complainant and payment was made from the account of complainant. Copy of bill of the urea dt 5.12.2014 is Ex OP-5. There was a shortage of urea throughout the country in Rabi season 2014-15. So, urea was supplied to the members as per availability of supply and demand. Due to shortage, 15 bags of urea were given to complainant against his demand of 20 bags. The official of OP-1 distributed urea in the presence of members of the society. Due to shortage of supply of urea, the urea was distributed among members by ratio of demand and supply. After 5.12.2014, complainant never came to OP-1 to get more urea as supply was received in the Society after 5.12.2014. Complainant did not purchase any fertilizer from the Society in Rabi season 2013-14 and he purchased the same from market and in this season because there was a shortage of urea in the market, complainant demanded urea from OP-1. Copy of the statement of account of complainant is Ex OP-1/2, copy of Stock Register is Ex OP-1/3, copy of Sale Register is Ex OP-4 and copy of bill dt 4.12.2014 regarding diesel supply to complainant is Ex Op-6. Even as per practice, only 3 bags of urea are required to be applied in one acre of land i.e too to be applied in two instalments : 1^st in the month of December at the time of irrigating the land and 2^nd instalment is to be applied after on month i.e in the month of January.  Even as per pleadings of the complainant, the Society has supplied 3 bags of urea per acre i.e more than sufficient to apply in 10 acres of land as 1^st installment in December. As complainant never approached OPs for supply of urea after 5.12.2014, rather he filed the present complaint before this Forum on 24.12.2014 i.e much earlier than  2^nd instalment of urea which is to be applied in the land in the month of January. The complainant has not suffered any loss to his wheat crop and has also not suffered any mental tension and harassment. Complainant has filed this complaint only with malafide intention to harass the OPs and to get illegal monetary benefits and to humiliate the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

10                                   The complainant has filed the present complaint on the ground that the Society has not supplied urea as per his demand and due to which, he has suffered loss to his wheat crop. It is admitted case of the parties that complainant is a member of OP-1 and he is entitled to get fertilizers from OP-1. It is admitted by the complainant in his pleadings that OPs supplied him 3 bags of urea per acre in the Rabi season 2014-15 and on his demand they did not supply him more urea. As per practice, only 3 bags of urea are required for 1 acre of land and i.e too to be supplied in two instalments; 1^st in the month of December and 2^nd in the month of January. As per pleadings of the complainant, he received 3 bags of urea per acre from OP-1, which is more than urea for 1^st instalment and the 2^nd instalment was to be applied in the January, but complainant filed the present complaint on 24.12.2014 without waiting for the supply of urea by OPs for the month of January. If it is presumed that complainant required more urea to be applied in his land, he could easily purchase the same from the market as OPs have given Rs 1,10,000/-in cash, which is admitted by him. Even he did not wait to get supply of urea to him by OPs in January as OPs argued that there was shortage of urea and they supplied urea to members as per ratio of demand and supply.

11.                              In the light of above discussion and keeping in view circumstances of case and evidence led by parties, we are fully convinced with the arguments advanced by OPs and we do not find any merit in the present complaint filed by complainant. Consequently, the complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed. However, due to peculiar set of circumstances, there is no order as to costs. Copies of order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced in open Forum:

Dated: 25.08.2015       

Member                 Member             President                (Parampal Kaur)    (P Singla)           (Ajit Aggarwal)