JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER(ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner heard. 2. Vide agreement dated 22.6.1997 and 7.6.1997, the complainant, Kiran Machine Tools Ltd. placed an order for purchase of plants with Indian Seeds & Agricultural Horticultural firm, the opposite party. It was agreed with specific terms and conditions about the supply, installation and maintenance of the plants. The contract was going on smoothly upto 14.8.1997 from 7.7.1997 but suddenly the opposite party, Indian Seeds & Agricultural Horticultural Firm stopped the work of construction without assigning any reason. The opposite party, Indian Seeds & Agricultural Horticultural Firm contended that the complainant obstructed the work of plantation by restraining their employees. 3. In the meantime, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Jalgaon. The District Forum partly allowed the complaint. The District Forum directed the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,18,392/- as compensation to the complainant i.e. the total cheque amount paid by the complainant to the respondent from time to time. It also directed that Rs.50,000/- be paid for not giving service and not completing the work, to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.6,000/- towards costs. The District Forum directed the opponent to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant about the expenses of drip irrigation parts and payment of new purchased plant and payment of labour charges to sowing the plants etc. The opponent also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and physical torture. The opposite party was also directed to pay Rs.3,000/- towards costs. 4. The opposite party preferred an appeal before the State Commission. The State Commission modified the order of the District Forum and directed that an amount of Rs.39,858/- as refund of the price of the plants instead of Rs.25,000/-. The State Commission also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- for costs of the appeal. 4. Still aggrieved, the revision petition has been filed by the complainant before this Commission. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had paid total price in the sum of Rs.1,18,392/- and the total amount should be given to the complainant. We find force in the argument in a measure. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not given the account that how much plants were installed and how much were left. It must be borne in mind that it is the petitioner/ complainant and nobody else who is to carry the ball in proving its case. The petitioner has not come to the Commission with clean hands. It should have given the account for how much amount the plants and seeds were sown. 6. It is crystal clear that from 7.7.1997 to 14.8.1998, some of the plants and seeds were implanted/sown by the opposite party. The fora below have calculated rest of the amount at Rs.39,858/- which appears to be just and reasonable. It may be also mentioned that the contention of the opposite party, Indian Seeds & Agricultural Horticultural is that the petitioner obstructed the work of plantation by restraining their employees but no evidence in this respect was produced on record by the respondent. The respondent did not file a single affidavit explaining the fact in this regard. We find no flaw in the order passed by the State Commission and dismiss the revision petition. | 
