Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/72/2017

C.Henjarappa S/o Chikkanna - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorised signatory/The Proprietor,Green tech - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.P.S.Sathyanaryanarao

10 Apr 2018

ORDER

 

COMPLAINT FILED ON:07/07/2017

DISPOSED      ON:10/04/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

C.C.NO: 72/2017

 

DATED: 10^th APRIL 2018

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                   B.A., LL.B.,

                   SRI.N. THIPPESWAMY        : MEMBER

                          B.A., LL.B., PGDCLP  

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	C. Henjarappa S/o Chikkanna, Age: 54 Years, Agriculturist, Huchchavvanahalli Village, Hiriyur Taluk Chitradurga District.   (Represented By Sri. P.S. Sathyanarayana Rao, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Authorized Signatory/Proprietor, Green Tech, Poly Houses & Nurseries, No.41, Royal Garden Lay-out, Bharath Nagar, 2nd Stage, Opp: CIIQ, Byadarahalli, Magadi Road, Bangalore-560091.     2. The Deputy Director of Horticulture, Department of Horticulture, Sri.S. Nijalingappa Road, V.P. Extension, Chitradurga.   3. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, APMC Yard, Chitradurga.   2. The Senior Assistant Director of Horticulture, Department of Horticulture, Near T.B. Circle, Hiriyur, Chitradurga.   (Reptd. By Sri. C.M. Veeranna, DGP for for OP No.2 and 4, Sri. C.M. Shivakumara Swamy, Advocate for OP No.3 and OP No.1 ex-parte)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to pay Rs.18,00,000/- towards compensation with interest at the rate of 18% p.a, Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.5,000/- towards costs and such other reliefs.  

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant is that, the complainant is having an irrigated land measuring 2-acres, 27-guntas in sy.No.157 at Huchchavvanahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Hiriyur Taluk.  OPs are the contractors for construction of green houses, fans, pad cooling system, drip and mist system, shade net-houses, air drivers, static and movable benches, fruit ripening chambers and undertake turn key projects etc.  The complainant intends to construct protected cultivation structure type shade net house in his land measuring 1-acre.  In this regard, the complainant has obtained approved work order dated 29.12.2015 issued by the Deputy Director of Horticulture, Zilla Panchayat, Chitradurga for construction of shade net house in 4000 sq.mtrs for the total amount of Rs.34 lakhs, out of that Rs.17.00 lakhs is towards subsidy given by the Government.  Accordingly, the complainant by believing the version, approached the OP No.1 for construction of shade net house and OP No.1 has completed the construction work on 23.03.2016 and handed over the same to the complainant.  OP No.1 has given the warranty for three years and if any defects found within three years, the company stands guarantee to rectify the same.  During the construction of the shade net house, the OP has used the self-threaded screws, plastic coated Ziz-Qag Spring, G.I sliding Door system with ante-chamber and not utilized nuts and bolts as per final invoice dated 23.03.2016 for Rs.28,37,820/-.  So, it clearly goes to show that, the OP No.1 has not done the construction work as per the terms and conditions as imposed by the Department of Horticulture.  Moreover, the OP No.1 has not fixed the Aluminium beading, plastic quoted springs, HDPE shade net and GI wires etc., but, the OP No.1 has not used the standard quality ISI marked materials for construction and violated all the terms and conditions of the Department of Horticulture.  For the above material facts, it is crystal clear that, the OP No.1 has cheated the complainant, which is a deficiency in service and shows the dereliction of duties and unfair trade practice towards the complainant.  For this illegal act of the OP No.1, the complainant has incurred heavy financial loss and suffering from mental agony and pain.  It is further submitted that, the complainant has completely lost tomato and other horticulture crops and incurred loss of Rs.8.00 lakhs.  For non-fixing of shade nets, net has been completely torn out and crops have been failed, now it requires Rs.10 lakhs.  The land of the complainant is fertile and having good soil, suitable for horticulture crops.  The failure of the crop is mainly due to the defective construction of the shade net house constructed by the OP No.1.  The complainant has invested huge amount by borrowing loan from his relatives and friends.  For all these lapses, OP No.1 is liable to pay the compensation to the loss of crops and defective construction done by the OP No.1.  The cause of action for the complaint is arisen at Chitradurga which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum on 25.03.2017 when the notices were duly served through is counsel by RPAD but, the OP No.1 has not complied for the same nor made any alternative remedy to refund the amount paid by the complainant and prayed for allow the complaint.   

3.      After service of notice, OP No.1 did not appear before this Forum and placed ex-parte.  One Sri. C.S. Shivakumara Swamy, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.3 and failed to file version or affidavit.  On behalf of OP No.2 and 4 Sri. C.M. Veeranna, District Government Pleader appeared and filed version. 

According to the version filed by OP No.2 and 4 that, the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP No.2 to 4.  The allegations made against OPs 2 to 4 are not specifically admitted and denied as false, they are created story by the complainant and prays for dismissal of the complaint.  The averments made in para 2 to 4 are true and correct and admitted.  The allegations made in para 5 is denied as false and complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  The allegations made in para 5 that, the OP No.1 has cheated the complainant, committed deficiency in service and shown dereliction of duties and unfair trade practice towards the complainant and for this illegal act of the OP No.1, the complainant has incurred heavy financial loss and suffered mental agony and pain is denied as false.  The allegations made in para 6 of the complaint are only an imaginary and these facts are created for the purpose of filing this complaint against OP No.2 to 4 and there is no cause of action for filing this complaint.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief against the OP No.2 to 4 as the complainant has not hired any service from OP No.2 to 4.  The complainant is not a consumer and it is not a consumer dispute.  Hence, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  The documents produced by the complainant is only an imaginary and prays for dismissal of the complaint.      

4.      The complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-8 were got marked and closed his side.  On behalf of OPs, one Sri. H.T. Balakrishna, Deputy Director of Horticulture has examined as DW-1 and and no documents have been got marked and closed their side.     

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

1. Whether the complainant proves that, OPs have committed deficiency of service in constructing the green house/shade net house in his land bearing sy.No.157 measuring 1-acre at Huchchavvanahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Hiriyur Taluk and entitled for the relief as prayed for?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in affirmative.

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:-  It is not in dispute that, the complainant is having land bearing sy.No.157 measuring 2-acres 27-guntas situated at Huchchavvanahalli village, Hiriyur Taluk.  Out of which he intended to construct green house in 1-acre of land.  OP No.1 is the contractor for green house.   As per the promise made by the OP No.1, the complainant intends to construct the protected cultivation structure type shade net house in his land.  In this regard, the complainant has obtained the approved work order dated 29.12.2015 issued by the Deputy Director of Horticulture, Chitradurga for construction of shade net house in 4000 sq.meters for total amount of Rs.34 lakhs, out of which, the Government has sanctioned subsidy for Rs.17 lakhs and the remaining the amount has been paid by the complainant to the OP No.1.  In this case, the OP No.2 to 4 have not committed any deficiency of service.  As per the agreement, the OP No.1 never constructed the shade net house, therefore, the complainant intimated the OP No.1 for non-construction of the shade net house.  The OP No.1 handed over the same to the complainant on 23.03.2016 and the OP No.1 has given three years warranty, if any defects found within three years, the OP No.1 is held responsible for the same.  After handing over the green house, the complainant found some defects, then the complainant approached the OP No.1 and asked to rectify the same by issuing notice.  But, the OP No.1 never replied or solve the problem.  Due to the no performance of the OP No.1, the complainant has suffered financial loss nearly Rs.8 lakhs for loss of tomato and other horticulture crops.  Due to the non-performance of the OP No.1, the complainant has suffered mental agony.  The documents produced by the complainant clearly shows that, the OP No.2 to 4 have send the work order and subsidy amount for construction of the shade net house but, OP No.1 has constructed the same as per the terms and conditions.  Ex.A-1 is the newspaper, which shows that, the complainant has taken steps through paper publication.  By that time also, OP No.1 did not turn up.  Ex.A-2 to 8 are the documents issued by green tech company for collecting the amount from the complainant and from OP No.2 to 4.  The documents produced by the complainant clearly shows that, OP No.1 has collected money from the complainant as well as from OP No.2 to 4.

9.   We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainants, which clearly shows that, the complainant is having 2-acres 27-guntas of land in sy.No.157 at Huchchavvanahalli village, Hiriyur taluk.  Out of which, the complainant intended to construct shade net house in 1-acre or 4000 sq.meters of land.  Accordingly, OP No.2 to 4 have sanctioned Rs.17 lakhs, the subsidy amount, the total amount for construction of the shade net house is of Rs.34,000/- and the remaining amount has been paid by the complainant by obtaining loan from his friends and relatives.  The complainant is a consumer under OP No.1, the OP No.2 to 4 have paid only Rs.17,00,000/- to the OP No.1 and remaining amount has been paid by the complainant himself.  Hence, the complainant is a consumer under OP No.1 and OP No.1 has committed deficiency in service in constructing the shade net house and cheated the complainant.  Therefore, OP No.1 is held responsible to pay the compensation to the complainant as there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1 only.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.    

  10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that, the OP No.1 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards loss of tomato and other agricultural crops to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of receipt of the amount till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 is hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and  Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

The complaint filed as against OP No.2 to 4 are hereby dismissed.  

It is further ordered that, the OP No.1 is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 10/04/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

 

                                     

 MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

 

DW-1: Sri. H.T. Balakrishna, Deputy Director of Horticulture, by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Udayavani News Paper dated 14.11.2017
02	Ex-A-2:-	Work Order dated 29.12.2015
03	Ex-A-3:-	Material List dated 23.03.2015
04	Ex.A-4:	Warranty
05	Ex.A-5:-	Work Completion Certificate
06	Ex.A-6:-	Declaration
07	Ex.A-7:-	Final Invoice dated 23.03.2016
08	Ex.A-8:-	Office Order dated 26.09.2017

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

Rhr**