A/292/2017
Shakti Cold Storage and Ice Factory V/s Ram Bux Verma
18-12-2017
Sri Sanjay Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the appellant appeared.
None appeared for respondent. Service of notice has already been held sufficient on respondent vide order dated 25-09-2017.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has filed written arguments.
Heard learned Counsel for the appellant on application for delay condonation.
The impugned judgment and order is dated 20-11-2013 and appeal has been filed on 10-02-2017. In affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application it has been contended that the copy of impugned judgment and order was received by appellant on 03-12-2013. Thereafter appellant contacted Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla, Advocate for filing appeal and supplied him certified copy of judgment to file appeal.
It has been further contended that Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla informed deponent that appeal has been filed before State Commission but in the last week of January, 2017 when recovery citation was issued by Tehsil against appellant, the appellant tried to contact Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla, Advocate but could not contact him. Thereafter he came to Lucknow and tried to contact him. The he was informed that Sri Surendra Kumar Shukla is not coming to State Commission for about one year. He has cheated him. Thereafter appellant engaged other Counsel and filed present appeal before State Commission.
None appeared for respondent despite sufficient service of notice to oppose delay condonation application. The statement made by appellant on oath in affidavit has not been controverted by respondent. Therefore I have no reason to disbelieve the statement of appellant regarding delay in filing appeal.
In view of above delay condonation application is allowed and delay of appeal is condoned.
Admit and register appeal.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appeal should be disposed of finally on merits today.
I have heard learned Counsel for the appellant.
Judgment delivered on separate sheets.
Appeal is allowed in part.
President
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2017
(Against the judgment/order dated 20-11-2013 in Complaint Case
No. 03/2008 of the District Consumer Forum, Faizabad )
Shakti Cold Storage and Ice Factory
Through Proprietor Ram Nath Jaiswal
M/s. Saptrishi Capsek Private Limited
Naka Muzaffara
District Faizabad
...Appellant/Opposite Party
Vs.
Ram Bux Verma
S/o Sri Rajdev Verma
R/o Village Jugwapur Sultanpur
Post Arthar, Pargana Mangalsi
Tehsil Sohawal, District Faizabad
...Respondent/Complainant
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
For the Appellant : Sri Sanjay Jaiswal, Advocate.
For the Respondent : None appeared.
Dated : 18-12-2017
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT (ORAL)
This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 20-11-2013 passed by District Consumer Forum, Faizabad in Complaint No. 03 of 2008 Ram Bux Verma V/s Shakti Cold Storage and Ice Factory whereby District Consumer Forum, Faizabad has allowed complaint and ordered appellant/opposite party to pay to respondent/complainant Rs.10,000/- price of potatoes with simple interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum from the date of complaint within one month from date of judgment. The District Consumer Forum has further ordered appellant/ opposite party to pay to respondent/complainant Rs.3,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation.
Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum, appellant/opposite party has filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Mr. Sanjay Jaiswal appeared for appellant.
:2:
None appeared for respondent despite sufficient service of notice.
I have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.
It is contended by learned Counsel for appellant that the price of potatoes fixed by District Consumer Forum is very high and excessive.
It is further contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the rate of interest awarded by District Consumer Forum is also very high.
It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the District Consumer Forum has awarded interest on the value of potatoes to the respondent/complainant. Therefore, Rs.3,000/- awarded by District Consumer Forum as additional compensation to the complainant is not justified.
I have considered submission made by learned Counsel for the appellant.
The District Consumer Forum has fixed price of potatoes at the rate of Rs.400/- per quintal. The appellant has shown judgment rendered by District Consumer Forum in Complaint No. 232/2009 Krishna Kumar Tiwari V/s Shakti Cold Storage and Ice Factory wherein in year 2008 the District Consumer Forum has fixed price of potatoes at the rate of Rs.250/- per quintal.
Considering price fixed by District Consumer Forum, Faizabad in year 2008, in said complaint I find it just to assess the amount of compensation on the basis of price fixed at the rate of Rs.250/- per quintal. Thus the price of 25 quintals potatoes kept by respondent/complainant in cold storage of appellant goes to Rs.6,250/-. The impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum should be modified accordingly.
The District Consumer Forum has awarded interest at the rate of 9 per annum. The rate of interest awarded by District Consumer Forum appears appropriate.
The District Consumer Forum has awarded interest on the price of potatoes. Therefore, Rs.3,000/- awarded by the District Consumer Forum as additional compensation to complainant/respondent should be set aside.
:3:
In view of above appeal is allowed partially and appellant/opposite party is ordered to pay to complainant Rs.6,250/- price of potatoes with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till date of actual payment.
Rs.3,000/- compensation awarded by District Consumer Forum to respondent/complainant is set aside but the appellant/opposite party shall pay to respondent/complainant Rs.2,000/- cost of litigation as ordered by District Consumer Forum.
In this appeal parties shall bear their own costs.
Rs.11,600/- deposited by appellant under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 in this appeal shall be remitted alongwith interest accrued to the District Consumer Forum for disposal in accordance with this judgment.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A. H. KHAN )
PRESIDENT
Pnt.
