LAWS(NCD)-2001-3-165

MALKIAT SINGH Vs. SATWINDER COLD STORE

Decided On March 30, 2001
MALKIAT SINGH Appellant
V/S
SATWINDER COLD STORE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated the allegations of the complainant before the District Forum in his complaint were that he had hired the services of the opposite parties for consideration for storing 74 bags of potato seeds in their cold-storage at Village Chogwan on 25.3.1996. On 9.9.1996 when he had gone to get his potato seeds from the cold storage for agricultural operation, he found that his potato seeds had been spoiled and had been giving filthy smell and had been rotten stuff. The complainant has alleged that he suffered a loss to the tune of Rs.37,000/- as market value of the seeds was Rs.500/- per bag. He also could not sow his six acres land which he had hired for agriculture purpose for sowing potato. Thus, he suffered a loss to the extent of Rs.70,000/- on that score. A prayer was made in the complaint that the complaint be allowed and the opposite parties be directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,07,000/-.

(2.) The complaint was contested by the opposite parties. Preliminary objection was taken about the maintainability of the complaint. On merits, it was admitted that 74 bags of potatoes were stored with the opposite parties; but any negligence or deficiency in service on their part was denied. It was also denied that the potato seeds were spoiled or were giving bad smell as alleged in the complaint. It is rather stated in the reply that on 26.9.1996 the complainant had taken back the delivery of 75 bags from the opposite parties vide receipt of that date. It was further stated in the reply that the complainant was liable to pay Rs.70/- per bag as storage charges to the opposite parties. It was denied that the complainant had suffered any loss or had hired any land. The complaint had been termed as false and frivolous and a prayer for its dismissal was made.

(3.) After hearing the Counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (hereinafter called the District Forum) dismissed the complaint as meritless. Hence this appeal.