Kerala

Kottayam

CC/1/2024

DEVSREE MENON - Complainant(s)

Versus

GAGAN PREET KHAN - Opp.Party(s)

28 Jun 2024

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kottayam
Kottayam
 
Complaint Case No. CC/1/2024
( Date of Filing : 05 Jan 2024 )
 
1. DEVSREE MENON
SHREESHYLAM VATTAKUNNU. P.O. MEENADOM ,PAMPADY KOTTAYAM 686 516 RESIDING KALATHOOR ELANGULAM.P.O PONKUNNAM,KOTTAYAM
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. GAGAN PREET KHAN
PROPRIETOR SAHIB DAIRY FARM MANDI DABWALI SIRSA,HARYANA 125 104
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. V.S. Manulal PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Bindhu R MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. K.M.Anto MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 28 Jun 2024
Final Order / Judgement

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM

Dated, the 28th day of June, 2024

 

Present:  Sri. Manulal V.S. President

  

 Sri. K.M. Anto, Member

C C No. 01/2024 (Filed on 05.01.2024)

Complainant           

:

Devsree Menon,

D/o Vijay Menon,

Shreeshylam

Vattakunnu,

Vattakunnu P.O.,

Meenadom,

Pampady,

Kottayam – 686 616,

Residing at Kalathoor,

Elangulam P.O.,

Ponkunnam, Kottayam.

 

      (By Adv. Mathew Abraham)

 

Opposite party       

 

Gagan Preet Khan,

S/o Makhan Khan,

Proprietor,

Sahib Dairy Farm,

Mandi Dabwali Sirsa,

Haryana -125 104.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

Sri. K.M. Anto, Member

          The complaint is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.  

The brief of the complaint is as follows. The opposite party is a farm owner and cattle dealer in Punjab- Haryana border. The opposite party owns a YouTube channel named MALWA FARM and through this channel the opposite party uploads marketing videos and offers that they can supply good quality PURE BREED JERSEY COWS which can give up to 20 to 30 liters of milk per day. The opposite party further assures that they will deliver the cattle in safe and healthy condition to any part of India. Inspired by the videos of the opposite party in the YouTube channel, the complainant purchased five PURE JERSEY HEIFER cows and three PURE JERSEY cows to support her financially struggling family. The complainant along with her sister Devika Menon contacted the opposite party for purchase of the pure breed jersey cows. The opposite party offered the complainant that they can supply good quality cattle and assured to deliver the cattles safely and in good health to the complainant’s house at Ponkunnam, Kottayam, Kerala.

On behalf of the complainant, her sister paid an advance amount of                  ₹ 80,000/- ( Rupees Eighty Thousand only) on 17.04.2023.  An amount of   ₹ 5,76,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Seventy Six Thousand only) was transferred to the account of the opposite party on 23.05.2023 also paid an amount of ₹ 35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand only) on 27.05.2023 for the transportation charges and ₹ 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) on 01.06.2023 being the balance for the transportation charges. The complainant paid a total amount of  ₹ 7, 06,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Six Thousand only) to the opposite party.

The opposite party shipped the cattle from their farm on 25.05.2023 and the cattle reached the complainant’s place at Ponkunnam on 01.06.2023. Upon arrival it is understood that two cows are having Hemorrhagic Septicemia (H.S) which is also known as shipping fever. The said fever was caused due to mishandling and improper transportation of the cattle by the opposite party. One cow was severely ill after reaching the complainant’s place and the bull calf delivered by it was alive at birth but died in a day’s time. The cow died in a couple of days and it was then understood that the cow suffered an internal injury during transit. The second cow that reached with H.S also died in another weeks’ time. The second dead cow was a Heifer and was 5 months pregnant. Two more cows had abortions due to the stressful transportation and unhealthy traveling conditions. Another cow costing ₹ 91,000/- (Rupees Ninety One Thousand only) which the opposite party promised that it is 7.5 month pregnant was found to be not pregnant at all. The complainant suffered huge financial loss due to the death of the cows and due to the supply of non -pregnant cattle.

The complainant contacted the opposite party forgetting the compensation for the losses. The opposite party had given ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation and promised to pay the balance compensation amount within two weeks. Thereafter the opposite party didn’t respond to the complainant. The opposite party caused huge financial loss to the complainant. The act of the opposite party is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. This complaint is filed for getting an order directing the opposite party to pay an amount of ₹ 15,38,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh Thirty Eight Thousand only) as compensation towards the losses and mental agony suffered by the complainant along with cost for this litigation.

On admission of the complaint copy of the complaint was served to the opposite party. The notice to the opposite party seen served on 29.01.2024 as per the track records. The opposite party failed to file their version or to appear before the commission to defend their case. The opposite party was set exparte. The complainant filed a proof affidavit and marked documents as exhibits A1 to A7.

On the basis of the complaint and evidence on record we would like to consider the following points.

  1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party
  2. If so, what are the reliefs and coasts?

For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No.1 and 2 together.

Point Nos. 1&2

On going through the complaint and evidence adduced it is clear that the complainant had purchased five PURE JERSEY HEIFER Cows and three PURE JERSEY Cows from the opposite party, who is running a farm in Haryana. The complainant had made a payment of ₹ 7,06,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Six Thousand only) towards the cost of the cows including transportation charges to the opposite party. The opposite party shipped the cattle from their farm on 25.05.2023 and the cattle reached the complainant’s place at Ponkunnam, Kottayam on 01.06.2023.

Ext A1 is the Google pay transaction receipt for ₹ 80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand only) on 17.04.2023 for the payment towards Gagan Sahib Dairy Farm and Ext A2 is the bill issued by the opposite party for this payment. Ext A3 is the payment slip for the transfer of ₹ 5,76,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Seventy Six Thousand only) to the opposite party  through State Bank of India on 23.05.2023. Ext A4 is the bill issued to the complainant having Serial No.12 nil dated for an amount of ₹ 5,50,000/-      ( Rupees Five Lakh Fifty Thousand only) as the cost for the eight cows.   Ext A5 is the Google pay receipt for the payment of ₹ 35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand only) to the opposite party on 27.05.2023. Ext A6 is the Google pay receipt for the payment of ₹ 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) to the opposite party on 01.06.2023. Ext A7 is the Certificate issued by the Veterinary Surgeon, Kanjirappally on 10.01.2024 stating that 2 Dairy Cows purchased by the complainant from outside state were died on 10.06.2023 and 12.06.2023 following prolonged illness and the cause of death was severe stress following transportation and subsequent adaptation problem leading to severe health issues. The animals were worth ₹ 80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand only).

It is evident that the opposite party offered the complainant that they would supply good quality cattle. Also assured to deliver the cattles safely and in good health to the complainant’s house at Ponkunnam, Kottayam. On receipt of consideration and transportation expenses the opposite party had delivered the 8 cows to the complainant at Ponkunnam, Kottayam on 01.06.2023.

But Ext A7 certificate of the Vetinary Surgeon proves that two cows were died on 10.06.2023 and 12.06.2023 respectively due to the severe stress following transportation and subsequent adaptation problems. Even though the opposite party had agreed to provide the compensation for the losses of the complainant they had given only ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation.

The complainant claimed ₹ 13,38,000/- (Ruppes Thirteen Lakh Thirty Eight Thousand only) as compensation towards the loss suffered to the complainant, but no evidence is adduced to prove this contention. Even though the complainant allege that two more cows had abortions due to the stressful transportation and unhealthy traveling conditions and another cow costing ₹ 91,000/- (Rupees Ninety One Thousand only) which the opposite party promised that it is 7.5 months  pregnant was found to be not pregnant at all, no evidence is adduced by the complainant  to substantiate this claim.

On analyzing the entire facts of the case it is clear that the opposite party failed to deliver the cows in a safe manner and in good health to the complainant.  Out of the eight cows delivered on 01.06.2023, one cow  died on 10.06.2023 and another died on 12.06.2023 due to Hemorrhagic Septicemia (H.S) which is also known as shipping fever.

The act of the opposite party amounts to inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which has been undertaken to be performed by the opposite party in relation to the service which resulted huge loss to the complainant is deficiency in service as per Consumer Protection Act 2019.

We allow the complaint and pass the following orders.

  1. The opposite party is directed to give ₹ 1,60,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Sixty Thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the loss suffered by the death of two cows.
  2. The opposite party is directed to give ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only)  as compensation for the mental agony and sufferings of the complainant.
  3. The opposite party is directed to give ₹ 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) as cost for this litigation.

The order shall be carried out within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the amounts shall carry 9% interest p.a from the date of order till realization.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 28th day of June, 2024

   Sri.K.M.Anto, Member   Sd/-          

  Manulal V.S, President    Sd/-

                                                           

APPENDIX :

 

Exhibits from the side of the Complainant :

 

A1     -  Copy of the receipt of UPI transactions dated 17.04.2023,    

   the advance payment paid to opposite party.

A2     -  Copy of the receipt bearing No. 103 issued by opposite party 

             acknowledging receipt of advance payment.

A3     -  Copy of the bank receipt evidencing payment to opposite party.

A4      -  Copy of the receipt bearing No. 12 issued by opposite party 

               acknowledging receipt of payments.

A5      - Copy of the receipt of UPI transaction dated 27.05.2023, the

             transportation charges paid to the opposite party.

A6     -  Copy of the receipt of UPI transaction dated 01.06.2023, the

             transportation charges paid to the opposite party.

A7     -  Certificate issued by the Senior Veterinary Surgeon, Veterinary      

              Polyclinic, Kanjirappally.

Exhibits from the side of the Opposite Parties :

 

Nil    

 

                                                                                        By Order,

 

 

                                                                                   Assistant Registrar           

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. V.S. Manulal]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Bindhu R]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. K.M.Anto]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.