RESERVED

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P., Lucknow.

Appeal No.2076 of 2012

M/s Jai Shankar Cold Storage & Allied Industries,

Gram & Post, Lakhbar Bajha, Faizabad Road,

District Barabanki through its Owner/Proprietor.

                                                                 …….. Appellant.

Versus

Ram Chandar s/o Molhey,

R/o Gram & Post, Nanmau, Pargana, Satrikh,

Tehsil, Nawabganj, Thana, Satrikh,

District Barabanki.                                     .…Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri A.K. Bose, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Jugul Kishor, Member.

Sri R.K. Misra, Advocate for the appellant.

Sri Ravi Kumar Rawat, Advocate for the respondent.

Date        28.11.2014

JUDGMENT

Sri A.K. Bose,  Member- Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4.2.2012 passed by the Ld. DCDRF, Barabanki in complaint case No.141 of 2011, the appellant M/s Jai Shankar Cold Storage & Allied Industries has preferred the instant appeal through its proprietor under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act 68 of 1986) on the ground that the impugned judgment and order passed by the Forum below is arbitrary, perverse and is bad in the eye of law and, therefore, it be set aside otherwise, the appellant will suffer irreparable loss.  

From perusal of the records, it transpires that the respondent/complainant had kept on rent 89 bags of

(2)

potatoes with the appellant and accordingly, he was issued receipt no.1230 on 27.3.2011. However, when he wanted to take back the potatoes, he was informed that the potatoes got petrified and accordingly, he was offered a very low price for the damages. Aggrieved by this remiss and deficiency in service, complaint case no.141 of 2011 was filed in which a sum of Rs.38,581.00 was claimed with interest towards petrifaction of the potatoes apart from compensation and cost of litigation. The case was decided on 4.2.2012 and the respondent/complainant was awarded a sum of Rs.38,581.00 with 10% interest apart from Rs.2,000.00 towards mental, physical and economical inconvenience. Aggrieved by this order, the instant appeal has been filed.

From perusal of the records, it transpires that the appellant has not denied petrifaction of the potatoes which were kept in the Cold Storage. No evidence has been adduced towards payment of compensation to the respondent. From perusal of the judgment, it transpires that it did not appear before the Forum below in spite of direct service of notice nor written statements were filed before the Forum below. Consequently, the complaint was ordered to proceed exparte on 21.11.2011 and exparte judgment was delivered on 4.2.2012. The Forum below took all facts, circumstances and evidence available on record before arriving at the logical conclusion. There is no irregularity or illegality in the order and, therefore, we are not inclined to interfere in it.

(3)

Besides this, the impugned judgment and order was delivered on 4.2.2012 and the appeal was filed on 20.9.2012. An application for condonation of delay has been moved in which the appellant has only submitted that the appellant came to know about this case when R.C. was ordered to be issued against it. This contention is against the documentary evidence available on record and categorically indicates that he has given affidavit on the basis of incorrect facts. From perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it is clear that notice of the complaint was served upon the appellant in accordance with the rules but the appellant did not appear before the Forum below nor filed any written statement. Thus, it can not be assumed that it had no notice about the case until the R.C. was issued against the Cold Storage.

Consequently, the appeal being meritless, is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. Certified copy of the judgment be provided to the parties in accordance with law.

         (A.K. Bose)                               (Jugul Kishor)

    Presiding Member                             Member

Jafri

ST G-1 Court No.5