Order By

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu,  President.

1.       The   complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) on the allegations that he is agriculturist and Opposite Party No.2 is doing the business of cold store under the name and style of Gagan Cold Store and accordingly, the complainant stored 4158 bags of potatoes weighing 50 Kgs per bag amounting to Rs.10,50,000/- for the period w.e.f. 04.03.2017 to 21.03.2017 with Opposite Parties against receipts. At that time, the Opposite Parties also obtained a cheque from the complainant as security. Further alleges that the complainant visited the office of Opposite Parties and requested them to give the delivery of the stored potatoes, but the Opposite Parties kept on lame excuses. Lateron the complainant has came to know that the Opposite Parties have sold the store potatoes 4158 bags without the consent of the complainant without the consent of the complainant and embezzled the whole amount and did not pay any amount to the complainant.  Thereafter, the Opposite Parties served a false notice upon the complainant with malafide intention to grab the price of potatoes in which false story was made, but in the reply, the complainant made request to the Opposite Parties  either to deliver the potatoes or to make the payment to the complainant, but to no affect.  Due to the above said deficiency in service of the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant suffered mental harassment and economic problems.   Vide instant  complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       To direct the Opposite Parties to make the payment of Rs.10,50,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum till its realization and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension, harassment and deficient service and Rs.25,000/- as costs of litigation or any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission,  may deem fit be granted.

Hence, the present complaint is filed by the Complainant  for the redressal of his grievances.

2.       Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint  by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable; that  the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint;  that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. This District Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to try the present complaint as voluminous evidence is required  and for this, the civil court has jurisdiction. The complainant has not come to this District Consumer Commission with clean hands, rather he has concealed the material facts from this District Consumer Commission. In fact, the complainant used to store his potatoes fruit in the cold store of the Opposite Parties and lastly he stored his bags of potato with the cold store of the Opposite Parties on rent basis for the period 04.03.2017 to 27.03.2017 i.e. total 5798 bags against duly signed receipts after reading the endorsement of receipts in this concern at the premises of the cold store of the Opposite Parties and at that time, seasonable rent was fixed @ Rs.110/- per bag total rent of Rs.6,37,780/- and the complainant deposited Rs.23,850/- in advance and outstanding amount of Rs.6,13,930/- and thereafter, the complainant took 959 bags and during the period of storage, the Opposite Parties paid full care and responsibility for the purpose to secure his potatoes and Opposite Parties also spent huge electricity for the safety of the potatoes of the complainant. As such, a sum of Rs.6,13,930/- was due towards the complainant and till 31.10.2017 Opposite Parties waited the complainant, but he did not turn up to collect his 4839 bags of potatoes  and afterwards, the potatoes were  going deteriorated and were not in a good condition and then the Opposite Parties destroyed the same as per the terms and conditions and the Opposite Parties also paid labour charges for the same. Thereafter, on the various requests of the Opposite Parties on 23.11.2017 instead of making cash payment, the complainant issued a cheque No. 456347 dated 23.11.2017 drawn on State Bank of India, Badhni Kalan for an amount of Rs.50,000/- for partly payment in favour of Gagan Cold Store to discharge his liability, but said cheque was dishonoured on 28.11.2017 due to ‘insufficient funds’. Not only this, the Opposite Parties also filed a civil suit for recovery against the complainant which is pending in the court of Ms.Amandeep Kaur Chahal, Ld.Civil Judge, Moga. In view of this, it is made clear that the complaint filed by the complainant is false and fabricated and is liable to be dismissed.   On merits, Opposite Parties took up the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and hence, it is prayed that the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against Opposite Parties.               

3.       In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his  affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C59 and closed his evidence.

4.       On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties also tendered  into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ranjit Singh Ex.OP1/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP84 and closed the evidence on behalf of Opposite Parties. 

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents placed on record.

6.       Ld.counsel for the Complainant has  mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and contended that he is agriculturist and Opposite Party No.2 is doing the business of cold store under the name and style of Gagan Cold Store and accordingly, the complainant stored 4158 bags of potatoes weighing 50 Kgs per bag amounting to Rs.10,50,000/- for the period w.e.f. 04.03.2017 to 21.03.2017 with Opposite Parties against receipts. At that time, the Opposite Parties also obtained a cheque from the complainant as security. Further contended that the complainant visited the office of Opposite Parties and requested them to give the delivery of the stored potatoes, but the Opposite Parties kept on lame excuses. Lateron the complainant has came to know that the Opposite Parties have sold the store potatoes 4158 bags without the consent of the complainant without the consent of the complainant and embezzled the whole amount and did not pay any amount to the complainant.  Thereafter, the Opposite Parties served a false notice upon the complainant with malafide intention to grab the price of patotoes in which false store was made, but in the reply, the complainant made request to the Opposite Parties  either to deliver the potatoes or to make the payment to the complainant, but to no affect and hence, there is deficiency in service of the part of the Opposite Parties.

7.       On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant and contended that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. Further this District Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to try the present complaint as voluminous evidence is required  and for this, the civil court has jurisdiction. The complainant has not come to this District Consumer Commission with clean hands, rather he has concealed the material facts from this District Consumer Commission. In fact, the complainant used to store his potatoes fruit in the cold store of the Opposite Parties and lastly he stored his bags of potato with the cold store of the Opposite Parties on rent basis for the period 04.03.2017 to 27.03.2017 i.e. total 5798 bags against duly signed receipts after reading the endorsement of receipts in this concern at the premises of the cold store of the Opposite Parties and at that time, seasonable rent was fixed @ Rs.110/- per bag total rent of Rs.6,37,780/- and the complainant deposited Rs.23,850/- in advance and outstanding amount of Rs.6,13,930/- and thereafter, the complainant took 959 bags and during the period of storage, the Opposite Parties paid full care and responsibility for the purpose to secure his potatoes and Opposite Parties also spent huge electricity for the safety of the potatoes of the complainant. As such, a sum of Rs.6,13,930/- was due towards the complainant and till 31.10.2017 Opposite Parties waited the complainant, but he did not turn up to collect his 4839 bags of potatoes  and afterwards, the potatoes were  going deteriorated and were not in a good condition and then the Opposite Parties destroyed the same as per the terms and conditions and the Opposite Parties also paid labour charges for the same. Thereafter, on the various requests of the Opposite Parties on 23.11.2017 instead of making cash payment, the complainant issued   a cheque No. 456347 dated 23.11.2017 drawn on State Bank of India, Badhni Kalan for an amount of Rs.50,000/- for partly payment in favour of Gagan Cold Store to discharge his liability, but said cheque was dishonoured on 28.11.2017 due to ‘insufficient funds’. Not only this, the Opposite Parties also filed a civil suit for recovery agianst the complainant which is pending in the court of Ms.Amandeep Kaur Chahal, Ld.Civil Judge, Moga. In view of this, it is made clear that the complaint filed by the complainant is false and fabricated and is liable to be dismissed.

8.       The case of the complainant is that the Opposite Parties have sold 4158 bags of potatoes amounting to Rs.10,50,000/- without his consent and embezzled the whole amount and did not pay any amount to him. On the other hand, the contention of the Opposite Parties is that the complainant stored 5798 bags in the premises of the cold store and at that time seasonal rent was fixed @ Rs.110/- per bag and total rent becomes to Rs.6,37,780/- and out of this complainant deposited Rs.23,850/- and outstanding amount of Rs.6,13,930- is still due and recoverable from the complainant. If we believe the contentions of both the parties, there is difference of Rs. 4,36,070/- allegedly payable to the complainant.

9.       On this point, we have heard both the parties and perused the rival contentions of the parties. To come to the just conclusion, as per the version of the Opposite Parties that they have to charge Rs.6,13,930/- on account of rent of their cold storge for storing the potatoes of the complainant alleging that at that time, seasonable rent was fixed @ Rs.110/- per bag total rent comes to Rs.6,37,780/- and out of which the complainant has paid Rs.23,850/- in advance and remaining amount  comes to Rs.6,13,850/- and said potatoes were stored by the complainant  w.e.f. 04.03.2017 to 27.03.2017 which were to be collected by the complainant till 31.10.2017 and such, as per the case of the Opposite Parties, they are at the most, are entitled to the interest of payable amount of Rs.6,13,850/-  for that 7 months which taking the higher rate of interest of  banks i.e. @ 8% comes to Rs.28,646/-  on account  of interest @ 8% per annum on it and in this way, the Opposite Parties are likely to recover the amount of Rs.613,850/- on account of rent of storage Plus Rs.28,646/- total amounting to Rs. 6,42,496/-.  Not only this, the complainant has also failed to prove that he has paid rent of the stored potatoes to the Opposite Parties.  But on the other hand, it is not believable  that the Opposite Parties who run a commercial business, could have throw away the potatoes of someone without the consent of its owner. Not only this, in the reply to the legal notice of Opposite Parties, the complainant has specifically mentioned that  he made request to the Opposite Parties  to deliver the stored potatoes and not to misappropriate and embezzled  the sale price of the stored potatoes,  hence, we do not agree with the aforesaid contention of the Opposite Parties that the complainant himself did not approach them to take the delivery of the potatoes.  However, the claim of the complainant is seems to be highly excessive as he has claimed Rs.10,50,000/-  i.e. the costs of stored  patatoes of 4158 bags x 50 kgs per bag and the costs of per kg comes to Rs. 5.05 paisa. As per the data collected from Horticulture Statistics Division, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare Ministry of Agriculture  & Farmers Welfare Government of India, New Delhi,  the status of State wise average wholesale prices of patoto of that period of northern states remains between Rs.307/- to Rs.425.60 paisa per quintal i.e. average Rs.3.66 paisa per kg.  As per this report of Horticulture Statistics Division, the costs of stored  potatoes of 4158 bags x 50 kgs per bag comes to Rs.7,60,914/-.

10.     In this way, as per the aforesaid calculation, the total costs of potato bags (4158 bags x 50 kgs per bag @ Rs.3.66 paisa per kg) comes to Rs.7,60,914/-. On the other hand, the rent which was payable by the complainant to the Opposite Parties was Rs. 6,13,930/-. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to recover the balance amount of Rs.1,46,984/- (Rs.7,60,914/- minus Rs.6,13,930/- = Rs.1,46,984/-) as per the aforesaid calculation and we decide the complaint accordingly.         

11.     Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant complaint is accepted partly and the Opposite Parties are directed to make the payment of Rs.1,46,984/- (Rupees one lakh forty six thousands nine hundred  eighty four only) as calculated above to the complainant alongwith interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 01.03.2019 till its actual realisation. Opposite Parties are also directed to pay compensation to the complainant for causing  him mental tension and harassment to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousands only). The compliance of this order be made by Opposite Parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant  shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this District Commission. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

11.     Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

          This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.