DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 120 of 08.05.2007<br /> Decided on : 13-07-2007 <br /> <br /> Tota Singh aged about 44 years S/o Zora Singh R/o Gali No. 2, Dashmesh Nagar, Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda.<br /> ... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> Gram Panchayat Mirjeana Tehsil,Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, through its Sarpanch.<br /> <br /> ... Opposite party<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM :<br /> Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President<br /> Sh. Hira Lal Kumar, Member<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh. Ashok Gupta, Advocate<br /> For the Opposite party : Exparte. <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT<br /> 1. This complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as `Act') has been preferred by the complainant with the prayer that opposite party be directed to pay him a sum of Rs. 3.00 Lacs for financial loss undergone by him and Rs. 1.00 Lac on account of feed of fishes and mental tension, harassment and botheration caused to him.<br /> 2. Factual matrix of the case of the complainant is as under :-<br /> 3. Complainant is resident of village Talwandi Sabo. There is pond in an area of 1-1/4 Killa in village Mirjeana. Canal water by turn was coming to it.. Dirty water from the village was also coming ot it. On 1.4.06, there was an auction for the allotment of the pond on lease basis for five years which was conducted by the opposite party. He was the highest bidder. Accordingly pond was given to him on lease basis for a consideration of Rs. 10,000/- for rearing fishes. This amount was deposited vide receipt No. 416 dated 1.4.06. At the time of auction, it was declared and announced that pond would remain as it is and that it would be used for bathing the animals. One of the conditions was that there would be 10% increase in the lease money every year. Nobody was to wash the drums of spray etc., in the pond. Resolution was passed by the opposite party mentioning eight conditions in it. Accordingly, complainant purchased 30,000 seed of fishes for Rs. 4,000/- from Fish Development Agency, Faridkot on 19.6.06. They were left in the pond. In the month of November/December, 2006, opposite party got grant-in-aid from the Government for development of the village and the Gram Panchayat. Grant for development of Village pond was received by the opposite party. Boundary wall around the pond was constructed after draining out the water from it. As a result of the construction raised, dirty water from the village and canal water could not enter the pond and it became dry. Seed of fishes left in it died. He alleges that he has suffered financial loss to the tune of Rs. 3.00 Lacs. He has further undergone mental tension, harassment and botheration. A sum of Rs. 20,000/- was spent by him for purchasing the feed for the fishes. Opposite party was repeatedly requested to compensate him for the loss caused to him due to its negligence, but to no effect.<br /> 4. Registered A.D. post notice was issued to the opposite party on 15.5.07. Neither registered cover nor A.D. was received back till 18.6.07. 30 days elapsed. It was deemed to have been duly served. No-one came on its behalf. Accordingly, it has been proceeded against exparte.<br /> 5. In exparte evidence, complainant tendered his affidavit (Ex.C-1), photocopy of resolution (Ex. C-2), affidavit of Major Singh (Ex. C-3), affidavit of Sh. Surinder Singh (Ex. C-4), affidavit of Baljeet Singh (Ex. C-5) and affidavit of Sh. Gursewak Singh (Ex. C-6).<br /> 6. We have heard the counsel for the complainant. Apart from this, we have gone through the record.<br /> 7. In his affidavit Ex. C-1 complainant reiterates his version in the complaint. Ex. C-3 is the affidavit of Major Singh who stated that complainant had taken pond in village Mirjeana on lease basis for rearing fishes. At the time of auction, there was no boundary wall around the pond. After auction of the pond, Gram Panchayat of the Village constructed bondary wall around it due to which water stopped entering it and the pond became dry. Fishes of the complainant died due to the fact that pond became dry. To the same effect is the affidavit Ex. C-4 of Sh. Surinder Singh. Baljeet Singh in his affidavit Ex. C-5 states that complainant had released seed of 30000 fishes for rearing out of which 80% were expected to remain alive. He had visited the pond for purchasing the fishes, but there was no fish in it as they had died as there was no water in the pond. According to Baljeet Singh full size of fish can be purchased @ Rs. 10/- per piece. Likewise is the affidavit Ex. C-6 of Sh. Gursewak Singh. Ex. C-2 is the copy of the resolution dated 1.4.06 passed by Gram Panchayat of Village Mirjeana according to which Village pond was given to the complainant on the basis of open auction on lease basis for Rs. 10,000/-. This resolution has been signed by the Sanpach and Panches. Complainant deposited Rs. 10,000/- on the same day i.e. 1-4-06 and receipt duly signed by the Sanpach of the Panchayat was issued to him, copy of which is Ex. C-9. Copy Ex. C-8 of receipt dated 19.6.06 issued by Fish Development Agency, Faridkot reveals that seed of 30000 fishes was supplied to the complainant for Rs. 4,000/-. Ex. C-7 is the another affidavit of the complainant which supports his version in the complaint.<br /> 8. Evidence led by the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted as opposite party has not mustered courage to contest the complaint. There is nothing to disbelieve the evidence of the complainant. From it conclusion is that pond was given by the opposite party to the complainant on 1.4.06 on lease basis for five years for a consideration of Rs. 10,000/- which was deposited by him on the same day. Complainant released seed of 30,000 fishes in the pond. Opposite party got grant-in-aid from the Government and raised boundary wall around the pond after draining of the water from it. Due to the construction of the boundary wall, water stopped entering the pond and it became dry and as a result of it fishes belonging to the complainant died. Pond was given on lease by the opposite party. Impliedly it was to render service by way of not interfering in its use by the complainant particularly when lease money of Rs. 10,000/- has been paid by him on the same day. Act and conduct of the opposite party proves deficiency in rendering service.<br /> 9. Complainant is craving for compensation of Rs. 3.00 Lacs for the financial loss undergone by him. Another sum of Rs. 1.00 Lacs is being claimed by him for the feed purchased for fishes and for mental tension, harassment and botheration. Complainant deposited Rs. 10,000/- with the opposite party on 1.4.06 and purchased seed of 30000 fishes for Rs. 4,000/-. Accordingly direction deserves to be given to the opposite party to pay him Rs. 14,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. i.e. interest on Rs. 10,000/- from 1.4.06 and on Rs. 4,000/- from 19.6.06 till payment. As per Book-let titled as Fish Farming For Food & Profit issued by Information and Extension Division, Directorate of Fisheries, Punjab, Chandigarh, Criteria of feed for the fishes has been given. According to this Book-let fishes grow to marketable size within one year of stocking of fingerlings. Complainant must have given feed to the fishes released in the pond. Had the pond not become dry due to the act and conduct of the opposite party, complainant could exploit fishes from it after they were to grow to marketable size and he could earn a lot. In these circumstances, he has certainly undergone financial loss for which he deserves some compensation which we assess as Rs. 30,000/-.For this, we are fortified from the observations of Hon'ble State Commission of Madhya Pradesh in the case of J. Radhakrishnan Vs. A Basheera & Another 2001(2) CLT 225 wherein it has been held that award of compensation always involves some sort of speculation and it is very difficult to quantify the amount of compensation on a rationale basis.<br /> 10. No other point was urged before us at the time of arguments.<br /> 11. In the premises written above, complaint is allowed exparte against the opposite party with cost of Rs. 1,000/-. Opposite party is directed to do as under :-<br /> i)Pay Rs. 14,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. i.e. on Rs. 10,000/- from 1.4.06 and on Rs. 4,000/- from 19.6.06 till payment.<br /> ii)Pay Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act.<br /> Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy failing which the amount of compensation would carry interest @ 9% P.A. till realisation.<br /> Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to record room. <br /> Pronounced :<br /> 13-07-2007 <br /> (Lakhbir Singh )<br /> President<br /> <br /> (Dr.Phulinder Preet) (Hira Lal Kumar ) <br /> Member Member <br /> <br />