Haryana

StateCommission

A/32/2017

MAUSAM ALI - Complainant(s)

Versus

MAHA SINGH COLD STORAGE - Opp.Party(s)

NITESH SINGHI

14 Jul 2017

ORDER

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

                                                First appeal No.32 of 2017

Date of the Institution: 09.01.2017

Date of Decision: 14.07.2017

 

Alisher S/o Mola Baka R/o Mohalla Gosain, Patti Baru, Badka Road, Baraut, Tehsil Bhagpat, District Meerit through their LR’s Mausam Ali S/o Alisher S/o Mola Baka R/o Mohalla Gosain, Patti Baru, Badka Road, Baraut,Tehsil Bhagpat, District Meerit.

…..Appellant

Versus

 

1.      Maha Singh Cold Storage, Mammudpur Road, Gohana, District Sonepat.

2.      The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. through its Branch Manager, Atlas Road, Modal Town, Sonepat.

3.      PNB, through its Branch Manager, Branch at Gohana.

                                                                             .….Respondents

 

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

 

Present:-    Mr.Nitesh Singhi, Advocate for the appellant.

                   None for respondent No.1.

                   Mrs. Swatantar Kapoor, Advocate for respondent No.2.

                   Mr. Amit Goel, Advocate for respondent No.3.

 

O R D E R

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

                   This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 23.08.2016 vide which application filed by appellant to ask respondent No.1-J.D. No.1 to pay to Rs.4,32,714/-, as per main order dated 18.03.2003, was dismissed.

2.               After order dated 18.03.2003, complainant filed execution petition on 15.06.2007 claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.3,12,818/- therein. Notice of that application was given to J.D. and objections filed by him were not accepted.  During pendency of that execution petition complainant filed calculation about the amount to be recovered from J.D. No.1.  On the basis of that calculation order dated  11.05.2012 was passed which is as under:-

“In the present case, vide order dated 18.03.2003, the respondent No.1 Balwan Singh was directed to pay a sum of Rs.250/- per quintal alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of germination till the date of realization and was further directed to pay a costs of Rs.5000/- for harassment and mental agony.

The perusal of the case file further shows that Ld. Counsel for the complainant has also filed the calculation in support of his case and as per the above calculation, an amount of Rs.1,23,383/- is due towards respondent NO.1 Balwan Singh till 21.04.2012.

Let Certificate of Arrear of Land Revenue be issued to the Collector, Sonepat with the request to recover the amount from the movable or immovable property of the above said Balwan Singh and remit the same to the complainant in compliance with the orders dated 18.03.2003. File be consigned to records after due compliance.”

Thereaftrer complainant filed another application dated 21.05.2012 claiming Rs.4,32,714/- as due towards J.D. NO.1. After hearing learned counsel of decree holder that application was dismissed vide impugned order dated 23.08.2016.

3.                Arguments heard. File perused.

4.                Learned counsel for appellant argued that actually his 606 bags weighing 80 kgs each were damaged and compensation was granted @ 250/- per quintal. In this way he suffered loss to the tune of Rs.1,21,200/-, but, executing court has granted Rs.37600/- as of compensation. Due to inadvertence calculation of 188 bags was submitted by him, whereas actually they were 606 bags, so impugned order dated 23.08.2016 be set aside and the amount claimed by him in application dated 21.05.2012 and subsequent interest be given to him.

5.                This argument is of no avail. From the perusal of the order dated 11.05.2012, mentioned above, he himself submitted calculation about the loss wherein he claimed compensation qua 188 bags. He might have received amount qua other bags and that is why he might not have mentioned the remaining amount therein.  The calculation submitted is as under:-

“Compensation awarded @ 250/qtls. 188potato bags each containing 80 kgs	Rs.37,600/-
Interest 12% from 21.08.1994 to 21.04.2012 (6535 Days)	Rs.80,783/-
Cost	Rs.5000/-
Total Amount alongwith interest upto 21.04.2012	1,23,383/-"

 

When he himself is asking for compensation to the tune of RS.1,23,383/- how the executing court can go beyond the same.

6.                More so, from the perusal of the complaint, it is clear that he no-where alleged that each bag was weighing 80 kgs.  He has also not produced any evidence to prove this fact.  In the absence of any evidence how it can be presumed that weight of each bag was of 80 kgs.  He has not challenged the validity of order dated 11.05.2012 as yet. Learned District Forum has granted compensation as per his own calculation so how  he cannot ask for more amount. Hence impugned order  dated 23.08.2016 cannot be set aside. Resultantly appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

July 14th, 2017          Urvashi Agnihotri                             R.K.Bishnoi,                                                 Member                                                Judicial Member                                           Addl. Bench                                       Addl.Bench               

S.K.