Complainant Narinder Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite party U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite party to make the payment of Rs.55,500/- on account of causing monetary loss to him by not preserving the goods properly, carefully in Cold Store alongwith Rs.30,000/- as compensation on account of mental harassment and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he kept stock of 34 bags of Potato (Seeds) containing 50 kg each. A sum of Rs.1500/- was paid in advance to the opposite party for preserving the stock for useful purpose and keeping the goods afresh vide receipt voucher no.529 dated 25.4.2015. The balance amount was to be paid at the time of delivery from the opposite party. He visited many times in the month of October 2015 even on the closing date of store i.e. 31st October, 2015 and demanded the whole stock of goods kept by the opposite party in his cold store but he every time avoided his demand of his own goods on one pretext or the other. Ultimately when he was in dire need of goods for the purpose to sell in the market at higher price and stressed upon the opposite party deliver the whole stock and the opposite party agreed to deliver the goods to him but he was stunned to see the worst condition of his stock of goods. It was completely deteriorated and spoiled and was giving foul smell. Neither the stock of goods Potato (seeds) was fit to sow nor was fit to use for ration. It was total loss of 34 bags of Goods (Potato Seeds). When he asked the reason of worst condition of the Goods stored by the opposite party, it was given to understand that it has happened due to non-functioning of Air Conditioner continuously and generator was not used as alternative source of power to maintain the cooling system as required. Since the reply of the opposite party was unsatisfactory and baseless, he refused to accept the spoiled stock of goods which were of no use for any purpose. A legal notice dated 11.12.2015 through counsel was served but opposite party did not give any reply. Thus, it is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party who appeared through its counsel and filed its written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable as the complainant has come to the Forum with soiled hands and have suppressed the true and material facts from this Ld.Forum and as such the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for and the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present false and frivolous complaint. On merits, it was submitted that the opposite party is owner of the Cold Store named and styled M/s.Raj Gold Storage, Gurdaspur and he is running the said Cold Store with due diligence and after taking into account all the necessary things. The complainant had stored his potatoes in the Cold Store of the opposite party and there are number of other customers who have also stored their respective potatoes in the store of the opposite party. The opposite party is having well equipped high technique Cold Store and there is every facility in the said Cold Store for proper maintenance of the potatoes. The potatoes of the complainant were properly stored in the Cold Store and properly looked after and maintained. At the time of its totally ripened status, the complainant was called by the opposite party with the request that at that point of time, the potatoes have been in ripened condition and the same are very suitable for selling at that time. But the complainant has shown hesitation on the pretext that he was having hope that at the time of ripening of the potatoes, good and excessive rate of potatoes will come in the Market, but the market is in very slump. The complainant remained waiting for the period when the prices of the potatoes will touch to the sky and in this hope, he did not remove the potatoes from the store of the opposite party. The other customers have removed their potatoes from the store on its ripening. Even the complainant was asked to remove the potatoes vide continuous several repeated requests but all the requests being made by the opposite party were put on deaf ears of the complainant. The requests were made to him since the opposite party has to close the Store. The present complaint is an abuse on process of laws. The complainant by way of filing this false complaint wants to extract some money from the opposite party and to drag the opposite party into unwanted litigation, as such the opposite party claims special costs from the complainant Under Section 35-A of Civil Procedure Code. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 and of Sh.Janak Singh Ex.C6, alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence.
5. Sh.Baldev Raj Prop. of Raj Gold Storage tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-5 and closed the evidence.
6. We have carefully examined and thoroughly considered the evidence along with its supporting documents as available on records of the proceedings in the light of the arguments as put forth by the learned counsels of both-side litigants while adjudicating the present complaint. We find that the complainant was reluctant to ‘lift-back’ his 34 Bags of ‘cold-storage’ Potatoes in October’ 2015 (as mutually agreed upon with the OP Cold Store at the time of storage in April, 2015) since he found the ‘potatoes’ damaged on account of ‘improper’ refrigeration at the OP’s end, in the very ‘first-week’ of October’2015, itself; whereas the OP has vehemently rebutted the complainant’s above charge alleging that the stocks were not lifted-back by the complainant on account of ‘low’ non-remunerative (un-profitable) market rates of potatoes in October’ 2015, against the high expectations of the complainant. In support of his version the OP has produced one notice dated 2.11.2015 Ex.OP-2 served ‘in-person’ upon the complainant. However, the allegation/ claim of non-remunerative market rates of Potatoes in October’ 2015 stays ‘not-proved’, as such. On the other hand, the complainant has miserably failed to prove the alleged ‘damage’ caused to the stored ‘potatoes’ at the OP Cold Storage on account of ‘poor’ refrigeration etc. We have seek-fully studied the 2 nos. of the complainants’ cited judgments of the honorable NCDRC, New Delhi in 2012(4) CLT 612 Punjab Agri Food Parks Ltd. & Anr. vs. Gurdeep Singh & 2012 (4) CLT 259 titled Sunil Gautam & Ors vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors; but respectfully state the variance in inter-se ratios since the ‘damage’ here to the stored potatoes with its ‘time & cause’ could not be established. Under the circumstances, we find that the complainant has failed to high-light any ‘statutory’ merit in its presentation to attract a favorable award under the Act.
7. In the light of the all above, we find the present complaint devoid of all actionable merit under the statute and thus ORDER its dismissal with no orders as to its costs. The complainant, here shall however be at liberty to avail of any ‘relief’ through a legal remedy available in law duly proceeded to as prescribed in law.
8. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President
Announced: (Jagdeep Kaur)
July,15 2016 Member
*MK*
