IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 13th day of September, 2021.
Filed on 04-02-2021
Present
- Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar BSc.,LL.B (President )
- Smt. Smt.C.K.Lekhamma, B.A, LLB (Member)
In
CC/No.35/2021
between
Complainant:- Opposite party:-
Sri.Peeter Jacob Sri.Jithu K.S
Karakkatt House S/o Saji
Ward-15 Kaippel House, Arakkuzha
Mararikulam North Panchayath Moovattupuzha, Ernakulam-686672
Mararikulam North P.O. (Exparte)
Alappuzha- 688523
(Party in person)
O R D E R
C.K.LEKHAMMA(MEMBER)
Brief facts of the complainant’s case are as follows:-
Complainant is a dairy farmer by profession. Believing the complainant, by opposite party that he is a cattle trader and doing dairy farming. The complainant attracted the advertisement made by opposite party through social media, he bought two cattles from the opposite party for an amount of Rs.1,16,000/- (One lakhs sixteen thousand only) on 07.06.2020. He assured the complainant that now one of the cow gives 12 Litres of milk in the morning and 8 litres in the afternoon. The other one is carrying and after the calve complainant can expect much quantity of milk from the cow. Accordingly complainant expect 20 litres of milk from each cow daily. The complainant look after and feed the cattles properly and give 12 Kg cattle feed price Rs.25/- per 1 Kg, and two bundles of grass price Rs.80/- per bundle, to the cows daily. But the complainant got only 5 litres of milk from one of the cows daily from the date of purchase itself. The other cow gives only 3 litres of milk after the calve. Opposite party knows about the yield of the cattles before and he suppressed the facts from the complainant. Due to acts of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service, thereby complainant suffered monetary loss and mental agony. Hence the complainant approached this Commission for refund the purchase amount of the cattles with interest, compensation for deficiency of service and cost of the proceedings from the opposite party.
2. In view of the above following points raised for consideration?
- Whether complainant is entitled to get refund the price of purchase money from the opposite party?
- Whether opposite party committed any deficiency of service?
- Reliefs and costs?
3. Complainant was filed proof affidavit and Ext.A1 marked. Opposite party remained absent even after the receipt of notice from this Commission. We have heard the complainant.
4. Point Nos. 1 and 2
On perusal of evidence nothing is before us to substantiate the transaction between the complainant and the opposite party. Ext.A1 is the photographs of the cows. Eventhough the opposite party remained exparte, the proof affidavit of the complainant alone is not sufficient to establish his allegations against the opposite party. No independent evidence with regard to the assurance made by the opposite party about the yield of milk from the cows and also no evidence before us that at present how much quality of milk attain from the cows. Hence we found that the complaint is devoid of any merit.
5. Point No.3
In the result we dismiss the complaint in limine. No order as to cost.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 13th day of September, 2021.
Sd/-Smt. C K Lekhamma (Member)
Sd/-Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar (President)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Photographs
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
To
Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.
By Order
Senior Superintendent
Typed by:- Sa/-
Compared by:-
