(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the complainant against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 1.1.2009 passed in Complaint Case No. 868 of 2008.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant came to know through an advertisement in the newspaper about the OPs are dealing with herbal plants and as such the complainant transacted with them in purchasing the herbal plants. At the time of counselling, the OPs had agreed that on purchase of herbal plants, the complainant would be entitled to subsidy @ 30% from the National Medicinal Plant Board, which as per the OP was available upon the growth of herbal plants. It was also told that as their Firm being registered with the concerned Board would follow up the claim of subsidy and handover the cheque to the complainant. The OP had further agreed to charge @ Rs. 6 per plant with an assurance that in actual, the rate which would be paid by the complainant would come to around Rs. 3.75 as Rs. 2.25 would be the discount on each plant and would be paid to him on the encashment of the cheque. Although complainant had a land but on showing the inability to start this business due to financial constraint, the OP assured the complainant that they will arrange the loan from the financial institutions at their end and got prepared the Project Report from one C.A. Sh. Harinderjeet Singh and Associates in the name of the complainant and after that a loan for a sum of Rs. 1.80 lacs was got approved from UCO Bank, Khizrabad, Distt. Ropar in February, 2006. On receipt of the money, the complainant handed over the draft to the OP with an understanding that they would apply for the subsidy as promised by them @ 30% of the purchase amount amounting to Rs. 54,000 and they would refund a sum of Rs. 67,500 being difference between the price charges i.e. Rs. 6 and price agreed i.e. Rs. 3.75. It was also averred that at the time of Counseling, the OP had also assured that their staff would visit the farm periodically but nobody ever visited the farm and nobody came forward to attend the grievance of the complainant for farming of herbal plants playing delaying tactics. It was further alleged that at the time of purchase of plants, OP had also assured that they would purchase the crop from him once it will be in full bloom, which they did not, due to which the crop weighing around 1 quintal was lying at Complainant s place and his repeated visits to the office of OP did not yield any fruitful results. As all the assurances and promises made by the OPs have proved wrong and they have cheated the complainant. Hence alleging the above said acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Hence, this complaint.
(3.) OPS were served through publication in the newspaper but nobody appeared on behalf of OPs. Hence, OPs were proceeded against ex parte.