SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Dr. Inderjit Singh, Presiding Member and
Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain, Member
Jaswant Nagar Cold Storage
Private Limited – Petitioner
versus
Prem Singh – Respondents
Revision Petition No 2761 of 2018 and
Revision Petition No 247 of 2019
Decided on 3.10.2025

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Opp. Party: Pawan Kumar Ray

IMPORTANT POINT
Cold Storage – Licensee cannot be allowed to breach or not to follow mandatory requirement of law.

Headnote:

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21 – U.P. Regulation of Cold Storages Act, 1976 – Section 17 – Cold Storage – Breach in Discharge of Service – Financial loss suffered in storage of Potatoes – Complaint allowed by District Forum – State Commission modified order passed by District Forum and directed opposite party to pay Rs.1,10,644/- along with 7% interest – OP being licensee cannot be allowed to breach or not to follow mandatory requirement of Section 17 while disposing of Potatoes of complainant – OP is guilty of deficiency in service – State Commission rightly observed that OP is liable to pay Rs.1,10,644/- after adjusting outstanding storage charges to complainant – District Forum was not justified in granting Rs.1,00,000/- as damages to complainant in absence of any convincing evidence in this regard – State Commission rightly modified order passed by District Forum. (Paras 12 and 13)

Result: Revision Petitions dismissed.

ORDER

Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain, Member—The relevant facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant/Prem Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the complainant’) being a farmer was cultivating the potatoes and used to store potatoes in M/s Jaswant Cold Storage Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the opposite party’) for the purpose of seeding. The complainant deposited Beej Foundation Potato Hybrid Seed on different dates i.e. 99 packets of potatoes mark no 1004/99 dated 06.04.2008 vide receipt 1004, 33 packets of potatoes mark no 1048/33 dated 06.04.2008 vide receipt no 1048 and 160 packets of potatoes mark no 1070/160 dated 11.04.2008 vide receipt number 1070. The complainant also deposited 132 packets of potatoes mark no 1071/132 dated 11.04.2008 vide receipt number 1071. The complainant as such deposited 424 packets potatoes in the cold storage i.e. the opposite party. The complainant took only 20 packets potatoes from the respondent vide receipt no 1048 and balance 404 remained stored with opposite party. The complainant stored 404 packets potatoes with cost of Rs.326 per packet including Rs.16/- as labour charge and Rs.10/- for bardaria (gunny beg) per packet total amounting to Rs.1,31,704/-. The complainant stored potatoes fot the purpose of seed to be used for cultivation in next season. The complainant communicated with the opposite party but the opposite party made false promises to the complainant for returning 404 packets of potatoes. The opposite party sold the packets of potatoes on good market price/value and due to this reason the complainant could not use these packets of potatoes for cultivation and suffered huge financial loss of about Rs.1,00,000/-. The complainant also sent legal notice dated 13.01.2009 which was replied by the opposite party wherein stated that there was no breach in discharge of service by the opposite party towards complainant. The complainant being aggrieved filed the consumer complaint bearing no 13/2009 titled as Prem Singh v. M/s Jaswant Cold Storage Private Limited under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Etawa (hereinafter referred to as ‘the District Forum’). The complainant prayed that the opposite party be directed to pay Rs.2,31,704/- to the complainant besides interest at rate of 12% per annum and Rs.2,000/-as cost of litigation.

2. The opposite party filed reply before the District Forum wherein stated that the complainant in the year 2008 had deposited 424 packets of potatoes in the cold storage i.e. the opposite party with total rent of Rs.22,260/-. The complainant on 01.08.2008 withdrew 20 packets of potatoes vide gate pass number 3369 on payment of Rs.1200/-. The charges for storage in year 2008 was Rs.105/- per quintal till 31.10.2008 and additional charge of Rs.10/- per packet was levied if someone wanted to withdraw packets in the months of November and December. The potatoes are stored in the cold storage from 15 February till 15 April and the storage charges are determined on this basis of market value of potatoes. The market rate of potatoes in year 2008 was so less that the profit earned after selling the potatoes after withdrawal from the cold storage was not enough to pay storage charges at rate Ra. 105/- per quintal. The complainant only made false promises to the opposite party for withdrawal of potatoes from the cold storage i.e. the opposite party. The opposite party diligently preserved the potatoes even after expiry of time limit of withdrawal.

2.1 The opposite party also published a notice on 19.12.2008 in daily newspaper Dainik Jagran whereby asked the farmers to withdraw potatoes from the cold storage till 25.11.2008. The opposite party on 19.12.2008 vide written letter informed the complainant and thereafter the complainant came to the opposite party and conveyed to the opposite party that he would be able to pay charges only after sale o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top