Date of filing 03-11-2011
Date of Disposal : 20-05-2013
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANANTAPUR.
PRESENT: - Sri S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L., President (FAC).
Smt. M.Sreelatha, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Monday, the 20th day of May, 2013
C.C.NO.165/2011
Between:
Pandirlapalli Ram Mohan Reddy
S/o Pandirlapalli Peddi Reddy
Lavnur Village,
Kondapuram Mandal
Kadapa District. …Complainant
Vs.
1. M/s Amar Seeds Co., rep. by its
Proprietor, Shivaji Chowk, Main Road
Jafrabad District, Maharashtra.
2. The Branch Manager,
VRL Logistics Ltd.,
Tadipatri, Anantapur District. … Opposite Partie
This case coming on this day for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri S.B.Subbaiah, advocate for the complainant and the 1st opposite party in person and 2nd opposite party is called absent and set-exparte and after perusing the material papers on record and after hearing the arguments on both sides, the Forum delivered the following:
O R D E R
Smt.M.Sreelatha, Lady Member: - This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties 1 & 2 to direct the 2nd opposite party to return the Onion Seeds of the same seeds and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and interest and grant such other relief or reliefs.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that: - The complainant is the permanent resident of Lavnur Village, Kondapuram Mandal and he is an agriculturist and leaseholder of other lands. He raised commercial crops and vegetables in the said lands. The complainant proceeded to Maharastra and approached the 1st opposite party for purchasing Onion seeds. After observing the seeds, the complainant purchased 62 Kgs., Pocket @ Rs.175/- for Rs.10,850/- on 30-05-2011 from the 1st opposite party. After purchasing the Onion Seeds from the 1st opposite party, the complainant booked the same in the 2nd opposite party branch/transporter at Jafrabad District on 30-05-2011 with seal after weight of parcel 64 Kgs., After 7 days the complainant proceeded to 2nd opposite party for his parcel but the same was not reached to 2nd opposite party. After 15 days the parcel came from Maharastra and the same was informed by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant by phone. The complainant approached the 2nd opposite party to take the seeds but on observation the seal parcel was opened and stitched by some one. The complainant surprised and measured the same in the presence of 2nd opposite party and found weight of 57 kgs., and the same was reported to the 1st opposite party but he did not give proper reply. The complainant brought the said seeds for raising commercial crop and the season for Onion seeds in the month of June. The complainant raised the said seeds in the dry lands. Due to open the sealed pocket and less weight, the complainant suffered mental agony for negligence of 2nd opposite party. The complainant surprised the same and informed the same to the 1st opposite party, but there is no response from them. Hence the complainant got issued legal notice on 08-07-2011 to the opposite parties. Though the 2nd opposite party received the said notice, he kept quiet and did not respond to the said notice. It clearly shows that there is negligence on the part of the 2nd opposite party. Hence, prayed this Forum to direct the 2nd opposite party to return the Onion seeds of the same seeds and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and interest and grant such relief or reliefs.
3. The 1st opposite party filed counter admitting that the complainant purchased the seeds to the extent of seeds but price of the said seeds are not paid by the complainant till today. The complainant does not come under the definition of consumer as he purchased the seeds for commercial purpose. Hence the complaint is not maintainable. This opposite party denied the contents of 4 para of the complainant as the complaint filed at Anantapur and no cause of action arise at Anantapur .As per section 11 of Consumer protection Act, the complaint is not tenable. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the opposite party resides outside this Forum and Branch Office of opposite party situated within the local limits of territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The complainant is not entitled for any claim. Hence, prayed this Forum to dismiss the complaint against the 1st opposite party.
4. The 2nd opposite party is called absent and set-exparte.
5. Basing on the above pleadings, the points that arise for consideration are:
1. Whether the complainant is a consumer under definition of Consumer Protection Act ?
2. To what relief?
6. To prove the case of the complainant, the evidence on affidavit of the complainant has been filed and marked Ex.A1 to A6 documents. On behalf of the 1st opposite party, evidence on affidavit of 1st opposite party has been filed and no documents have been marked on behalf of them.
7. Heard both sides.
8. POINT NO.1 – The counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant is a resident of Lavanur Village, Kondapur Mandal and he is an agriculturist and lease-holder of other lands. He used to raise commercial crops and vegetables in the said land. In this connection, the complainant proceeded to Maharastra to the 1st opposite party for purchasing Onion seeds. After observing the seeds, he purchased 62 kgs., pocket @ Rs.175/- per kg., for Rs.10,850/- on 30-05-2011 from the 1st opposite party. After purchasing Onion Seeds, the complainant booked the same through 2nd opposite party at Jafrabad District to transport the same on the same day i.e. 30-05-2011. Later the complainant proceeded to his native place. After 7 days the complainant enquired for the parcel from the 2nd opposite party but he has not received the same. After 15 days the 2nd opposite party informed about the parcel to the complainant. On the information received from the 2nd opposite party, he proceeded to the 2nd opposite party’s office and he observed that the parcel was opened and stitched the same by some one. Then he measured the same in the presence of 2nd opposite party and weight was about 57 Kgs., only. Further there was no reply from the 2nd opposite party. The said seeds were brought for the purpose of commercial crops and onions seeds to be raised in the month of June. Due to open of the sealed pocket and less weight of seeds, the complainant suffered a lot. Then the complainant issued a legal notice on 08-07-2011 to the opposite parties but there was no reply from the opposite parties. It is a clear case of negligence service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the complainant filed this complaint claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and prayed this Forum to return the seeds as he purchased from the 1st opposite party and grant such other reliefs.
9. The 1st opposite party appeared in person and filed his counter. He contended that the complainant purchased the seeds but he has not paid any amount to the 1st opposite party and there was due from the complainant towards the bill. Hence, the complaint is not maintainable. On the other hand, the complainant purchased the Onion seeds for commercial purpose and he does not come under the definition of consumer as well as there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The 1st opposite party contended that the seeds were purchased at Maharastra State and the same were booked at Maharastra and the opposite party is residing at Maharastra, the cause of action took place at Maharastra. As per section 11 of Consumer Protection Act this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and no branch office situated within the local limits of this Forum and the complainant is not entitled any amount as claimed by him as he does not come under the definition of consumer under the Consumer Protection Act and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground and there was no consideration passed between the complainant and the opposite party No.1. On this ground the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
10. As per the contents of the complaint and chief affidavit of the complainant, it is clearly mentioned that he is an agriculturist and lease-holder of other lands. He used to raise crops on the other lands for commercial purpose. In this connection only the complainant proceeded to 1st opposite party i.e. Maharastra and he purchased onion seeds for commercial purpose only and on the observations made in the complaint as well as documents filed by the complainant, it clearly shows that he booked the seeds from VRL Logistics Ltd., The documents filed by the complainant shows that he booked the seeds from Jaina to Tadipatri i.e.Ex.A2 . The complainant stated that he enquired about the parcel from the 2nd opposite party, which is Branch Office of VRL Logistics, Tadipatri, but he has not filed any document to show that the seeds were less than he book. The affidavit and complaint show that he is not a consumer as he purchased the above seeds for commercial purpose. As per section 2(d) of definition of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, he categorically mentioned in his affidavit and complaint that he purchased the above said seeds for commercial purpose and he used to raise crop for commercial purpose. Hence, he does not come under the definition of consumer as per section 2(d)(2) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the same was raised by the opposite party No.1 in their counter also. The 1st opposite party also mentioned in the written arguments that no consideration was passed between the complainant and the 1st opposite party and there was a due for the above alleged bill Ex.A1. We believe the version of the 1st opposite party as Ex.A1 is Xerox copy pertaining to purchase of seeds by the complainant. As per the definition of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint is not maintainable as he purchased the seeds for commercial purpose and this Forum also observed that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as the 1st opposite party resides at Maharastra and the transaction took place at Maharastra itself and the 2nd opposite party is added only for getting jurisdiction of this Forum and he has not filed any document to show that he made enquiries with 2nd opposite party. Hence the complainant failed to prove that he is a consumer as per section 2(d)(2) of Consumer Protection Act and the complainant also failed to establish that this Forum has got jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Hence, this point is answered accordingly in favour of the 1st opposite party and against the complainant.
11. POINT NO.2 – In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, this the 20th day of May, 2013.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT: ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOISITE PARTIES
-NIL- - NIL-
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT
1. Ex.A1 – Photo copy of Bill No.185 dt.30-05-2011 for Rs.10,850/- issued by the
1st opposite party.
2. Ex.A2 - Consignor’s copy dt.30-05-2011 issued by VRL Logistics Ltd., Jaina.
3. Ex.A3 – Photo copy of notice issued by the complainant to the opposite parties
1 & 2.
4. Ex.A4 - Postal Receipts for sending notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2.
5. Ex.A5 - Postal acknowledgement signed by the 1st opposite party.
6. Ex.A6 - Office copy of legal noticedt.08-07-2011 got issued by the complainant to
the opposite parties 1 & 2.
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER, PRESIDENT (FAC),
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR
