State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Kanpur Bharua Road Transport vs M/S Aditya Kirana Store on 8 November, 2023
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010 First Appeal No. A/2013/794 ( Date of Filing : 15 Apr 2013 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission) 1. Kanpur Bharua Road Transport a ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. M/s Aditya Kirana Store a ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. Rajendra Singh PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESENT: Dated : 08 Nov 2023 Final Order / Judgement Reserved State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission U.P. Lucknow. Appeal No. 794 of 2013 1- M/s Kanpur Bharua Road Carries, 133/125, Canal Road Triangular T.P. Nagar, Kanpur through Partner Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, 133/125, Canal Road Triangular Crossing T.P. Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar (UP) 2- Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Partner M/s Kanpur Bharua Road Carries, 133/125, Canal Road Triangular Crossing T.P. Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar (UP) 3- Subh Karan Dixit, (employee) but at the time of incident was partner and now he has not concerned with the firm. 4- Sri Mahesh Kumar Tiwari,(employee), M/s Kanpur Bharua Road Carries, Kanpur Branch, Kanpur Bharua Road Carries. ...Appellants. Versus M/s Aditya Kirana Store, Bharua Sumerpur, through Owner Sri Pradeep Kumar Gupta S/o Late Sri Ram Kumar Gupta, Muhal Gurguj, Kasba Bharua Sumerpur, Tehsil & District, Hameerpur. ....Respondent. Present:- 1- Hon'ble Mr. Rajendra Singh, Presiding Member. 2- Hon'ble Mr. Vikas Saxena, Member. Sri Anchal Mishra, Ld. counsel for appellants. None for respondent. Date 22.11.2023 JUDGMENT
Per Sri Rajendra Singh, Member- This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.1.2013 passed by the Ld. District Commission, Hameerpur in complaint case no.4of 2012, M/s Aditya Kirana Store vs. M/s Kanpur Bharua Road Carries.
The brief facts of appeal are that, that the impugned judgment and order is wholly illegal, erroneous and against the facts, law and record. No service of legal notice or no consumer complaint was served on the answering opposite parties and the case was proceeded ex-parte. Against the FIR the appellant has filed criminal case WP no.5107/2011 before the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad in which arrest has been stayed till further proceedings.
The complainant being helpless to hatch a conspiracy against the appellant inspired by ill intention to take huge amount of money from the appellant, he prepared a concocted story and lastly filed a consumer complaint.
After filing of complaint, the complainant first manipulated the service of the notices to the appellant and then filed consumer case in which he has manipulated to the effect that summons be not served upon the appellant and as such, he got ex-parte judgment.
The ex-parte judgment is against law and facts, therefore, it is most humbly prayed that impugned judgment and order be set aside or the case be remanded back for afresh hearing.
Heard ld. Counsel for the appellant Sri Anchal Mishra. None appeared for the respondent. We have perused pleading, evidence and documents available on record.
The complainant do the business of Kirana Store in Bharua, Sumerpur. The opposite parties no.2, 3 and 4 are the partners of the opposite party no.1 and do the transport business. On 11.6.2010, the complainant purchased 30 sacks Betel (Supari) for Rs.1,85,615.00 and handed over to the opposite party to be transported to his firm at Bharua Sumerpur. The notice dated 1.9.2010 has some typing errors, so he issued next notice dated 11.8.2011 but he did not get delivery of Betel and he suffered a loss of Rs.1 lac.
The opposite party no.4 refused to take notice and rest of the parties were not available at the time of delivery of notice, so the ld. District Consumer forum presumed the service of notice sufficient on the opposite parties and passed the impugned judgment and order:-
"परिवाद एकपक्षीय रूप से आंशिक रूप से स्वीकार किया जाता है। विपक्षीगण को आदिसत किया जाता है कि वे परिवादी को 30 बोरी सुपाड़ी का मूल्य 1,95,615/- रू0 तथा उस पर 10 प्रतिशत वार्षिक ब्याज परिवाद प्रस्तुत करने की तिथि 07.12.11 से वास्तविक अदायगी की तिथि तक का अदा करेंगे। वे उसे रू0 10,000/-रू0 क्षतिपूर्ति मानसिक आघात के मद में तथा मु0 2000/-रू0 वाद व्यय के मद में अदा करेंगे। परिवादी द्वारा निर्णय की प्रति प्रस्तुत किये जाने की तिथि से 30 दिन के अन्दर विपक्षीगण अनुपालन करेंगे।"
Before the ld. District Consumer Commission, the complainant filed copy of cash-memo and bilty and also the order of dismissal of writ petition. The opposite parties could not disclose any fact. Here in appeal the appellant has stated about the conspiracy but he could not tell as to what was the conspiracy. Burden is on him to prove that the delivery of goods was not made at the given address. In appeal the appellant has stated that the respondent has prepared a cock and bull story and also alleged that the respondent is habitual offender of the same kind of the cases for extracting money from other various persons and has filed forged cases against them. There is no evidence on record regarding extracting of money from other persons by the complainant. There is no evidence on record regarding filing of forged cases against various person by the respondents. So, in the absence of any evidence, it cannot be said that the judgment of the ld. District Consumer Commission is illegal and manipulated.
Photo copy of bilty dated 11.6.2010 and cash-memo dated 11.6.2010 have been filed before the ld. District Consumer Commission. Where is the conspiracy ? So in these circumstances, we are of the opinion that there is no need to interfere in the judgment of the ld. District Commission. The appeal is liable to be dismissed.
ORDER Appeal is dismissed.
If any amount is deposited by the appellants at the time of filing of this appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, may be remitted to the District Consumer Commission concerned for satisfying the decree as per rules alongwith accrued interest upto date.
The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself.
Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules.
(Vikas Saxena) (Rajendra Singh) Member Presiding Member Judgment dated/typed signed by us and pronounced in the open court. Consign to record. (Vikas Saxena) (Rajendra Singh) Member Presiding Member Dated 22.11.2023 Jafri, PA I Court 2 [HON'BLE MR. Rajendra Singh] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena] JUDICIAL MEMBER