IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                     CASE No.  CC/1/2019

 Date of Filing:                                   Date of Admission:                                                   Date of Disposal:

   02.01.2019                                            16.01.2019                                                                  29.08.2023

Complainant:           Manik Sekh,

                                S/o-  Late Lutu Sekh,

                                Vill- Sadikhansdear,

                                P.O.- Sadikhansdear,

                                P.S.-Jalangi,

                                Dist-Murshidabad.

                                PIN-742303

                                                                -Vs-

Opposite Party: The Manager,

                            Anurag Multipurpose Cold Storage (P) Ltd., Regd. Office

                            At Village Ramna Satbaria, P.O- Gangadaspara,

                            P.S.-Domkal,

                            Dist- Murshidabad, Pin-742303

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                          :           Srabani Das

Agent/Advocate for the O.P.                                       :           None

           Present:   Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.     

                             Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

                  Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

   SMT. ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY, MEMBER

   This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

One Manik Sekh (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Manager, Anurag Multipurpose Cold Storage (P) Ltd., Regd. Office (here in after referred to as the O.P.) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

The Complainant had deposited 17 (Seventeen) Quintal of Carrot on 20.03.2018 at Anurag Multipurpose Cold Storage (P) Ltd.(O.P.). On 28.08.2018 when the Complainant went to bring back the carrot from the said cold storage he had seen that all carrots were rotten at cold storage. So, the Complainant suffered the lost and claimed for compensation but the O.P. denied for the same. Though he informed the matter I/C Domkal, D.M. Murshidabad, S.D.P.O Domkal and B.D.O, Domkal for the compensation but yield no result.

Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed the instant case before this District Commission for appropriate relief.

Defence Case

After due service of the notice the O.P. did not appear. So, the case proceeded ex-parte against the O.P.

Points for decision

1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1, 2 & 3

 All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

Undoubtedly, the Complainant had deposited 17 (Seventeen) Quintal of Carrot on 20.03.2018 at Cold Storage of the O.P. (vide Annexure 1). At the time of taking back of the carrot from the said cold storage he had seen that all carrots were rotten.

After servicing of notice the O.P. neither appeared nor filed any W/V to controvert the plea of the Complainant for the reason best known to him. So, the case proceeded ex-parte vide Order No. 5 dated 18.03.2019.

As the evidence of the Complainant is supported by an affidavit so there is little scope to disbelieve the same.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents filed before us and the argument advanced by the Complainant we are of the view that there is negligence on the part of the O.P. as because the Complainant had stored the carrot in cold storage for future but it was the duty of the Manager of the Cold Storage to take care of the vegetable and the responsibility lies on the O.P. to keep the carrot in proper stage or to inform the Complainant before hand. But in the present case the O.P. fails to do so. Here lies the deficiency on the part of the O.P. So, the Complainant is entitled to get relief.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 02.01.2019 and admitted on 16.01.2019. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case is allowed.

 Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is                                                            

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/1/2019 be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the O.P. with a litigation cost of Rs. 10000/-.  

The O.P. is directed to pay Rs. 80,000/- to the Complainant for the negligence on the part of the O.P. and the O.P. is further directed to pay Rs. 30000/-for mental pain and agony.

The aforesaid order must be complied within 30 days of passing of this order in default the aforesaid amount will carry 10 per cent interest per annum from this date to till payment.

Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

            Member

               Member                                                       Member                                                         President.