IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 13thday of June, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 105/2020 (filed on 07-08-2020)
Petitioner : SabuChandi,
Kaithamattathil,
KoodalloorP.o.
Kidangoor,
Kottayam - 686584
Vs.
Opposite Party : Ratheesh,
Ennacheril,
Erathuvadakara P.O.
Manimala – 686543.
(Adv. Sijo Joseph)
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The case is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The brief of the complaint is as follows.
The complainant is a farmer, who is depending on the livestock of his livelihood. On 10-07-2020, the complainant had purchased a cow after the third day of calving for an amount of Rs.71,000/- from the opposite party. At the time of sale, the opposite party assured that the cow will give 11 liters of milk in the morning. However, the complainant is getting only 41/2 to 5 liters of milk from the cow in the morning. The matter was informed to the opposite party, the opposite party refused to return the money. The act of the opposite party is unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint is filed for getting compensation from the opposite party.
On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite party. The opposite party appeared and filed his version.
According to the version of the oppositeparty, he is not residing in the address given by the complainant. The address given in the complaint is that of his mother-in-law. The opposite party is working as a conductor in K.S.R.T.C and not a farmer. His mother-in-law was having cows. A cow from the mother-in-law’s farm was sold to the complainant on 11-07-2020 for an amount of Rs.45,000/-. He was also present at the time of sale of the cow, but not given any promise that the cow will give “11 liters of milk”. The complainant had raised false allegations.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Ext.A1 and A2. The complainant was examined as Pw1 and another witness was examined as Pw2.
On the basis of the complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant and evidence on record, we would like to consider following points.
- Whether there is unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party?
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider Point no.1 and 2 together.
Ongoing through the complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant and evidence adduced, it is clear that the complainant, who is a dairy farmer purchased a cow after three days of calving from the opposite party for an amount of Rs.71,000/- on 10-07-2020.
Ext.A1 and A2 are two advertisements given by the opposite party in the Facebook page of KERALA DIARY FARMERS ASSOCIATION (KDFA), Kerala. On perusal of Ext.A1 and A2, we can see that the opposite party had given advertisement for the sale of 5 cattles and 3 cattles along with photos of cattles. The person, who had given the advertisement is named as Ratheesh. Hence we cannot accept the contention of the opposite party that he is not conducting the farmhouse.
Pw1, the complainant and Pw2 deposed before the Commission. Though the complainant/Pw1 was vehemently cross examined by the counsel of the opposite party, nothing was brought to contradict the case of the complainant.
Pw2 deposed in the proof affidavit that opposite party made the complainant to believe that he will get 11 liters of milk in the morning every day. He further deposed that the complainant had paid Rs.71,000/- to the opposite party as sale consideration of the cow. It is affirmed by Pw2 that the complainant had getting only 51/2litres of milk in the morning. There is nothing to contradict the case of the complainant. The opposite party failed to produce any evidence to show that the cow was sold for an amount of Rs.45,000/-. The opposite party did not adduce any evidence to contradict the case of the complainant.
The act of the opposite party is unfair trade practice under Consumer Protection Act. Hence Point No.1 and 2 is found in favour of the complainant.
Taking into the consideration, the fact the cow is with the complainant, we allow the complaint and pass the following Orders.
- The opposite party is directed to give Rs.25,000/- to the complainant being the compensation for the losses and sufferings of the complainant
- The opposite party is directed to give Rs.500/- to the complainant as cost of litigation.
The Order shall be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the amounts will carry 9% interest from the date of this Order till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 13th day of June, 2022
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Appendix
Witness from the side of complainant
Pw1 – Chandi
Pw2 – Jaison Thomas
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Copy of advertisement in Face book dtd.21-10-2010
A2 - Copy of advertisement in Face book dtd.18-10-2010
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
Nil
By Order
Assistant Registrar
