RAMESHWAR PATEL Vs. SHANKAR BEEJ BHANDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None is present on behalf of the petitioner even on the second round. It is seen that none was present on behalf of the petitioner even on the previous date i.e. on 12.09.2019, therefore, this matter is decided under the provision of Section 13(2)(C) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(2.) It is seen that the brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/complainant purchased seeds from the opposite parties and his crop failed. He filed a complaint being no. 351 of 2010 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jabalpur, (in short 'the District Forum') but the District Forum dismissed the complaint on the ground that a crop can fail due to many reasons such as not following proper agricultural practices or due to improper use of pesticides etc. The District Forum concluded that no proof has been filed by the complainant for proving that the crop has failed due to substandard seeds. Hence, District Forum dismissed the complaint vide its order dated 08.05.2013.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the complainant preferred appeal before the State Commission, which was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution vide its order dated 5.5.2014. The State Commission has mentioned that no body appeared on behalf of the complainant on four consecutive dates i.e. on 25.10.2013, 13.1.2014 3.3.2014 and 5.5.2014. The complainant filed a review application before the State Commission, which was also dismissed vide its order dated 18.5.2017 on the ground that the State Commission did not have any power to review its own order.