M.V. Muralidaran, J.

The revision petitioner is the complainant in C.O.P.No.33 of 2008, on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri, since he did not appeared before the Forum on 06.06.2008 and the same was dismissed for default. Against which, the present petition has filed in I.A. unnumbered application S.R.No.369 of 2008 in C.O.P.No.33 of 2008, on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri to restore the C.O.P.No.33 of 2008 on file, which was dismissed for default on 06.06.2008.

2. But the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri has returned the unnumbered application stating that there is no power vested with the Forum to set aside the ex parte order under the Consumer Protection Act and aggrieved by the said order, the revision petitioner has filed the present civil revision petition before this Court.

3. The case of the petitioner is that though he has filed the complaint in C.C.No.33 of 2008 before the District Consumer Redressal Forum at Krishnagiri stating that the complainant is an Agriculturist. The complainant had purchased the banana plantain seedlings from opposite party in Numbers 3,500 at the rate of Rs.11/- per seedling and that the total cost paid is Rs.38,500/- and the complainant having the bill-cum-product delivery gate pass for the purchases.

4. The complainant further states that in order to raise good yield, the complainant ploughed his lands in a good manner, added the necessary manure in his land planted the said 3,500 plantain seedlings, watered the same periodically, applied the pesticides as per the advise of the Agricultural experts. The said banana seedlings which were planted in the land of the complainant and at present they are one year and 5 months old. To the surprise of the complainant, the said banana plants are affected by disease and there is abnormal growth. Though the complainant maintained his plantain garden in a good manner. For ploughing, tilling the land, manuring, watering for purchasing seedlings, transportation, etc., the complainant has spent more than a sum of Rs.2,10,000/-. The complainant utilised huge money as well as his good efforts. The plantain seedlings were nor grown up as represented by the opposite party. The complainant informed to the officer of opposite party then and there several times, in this regard, some officer of opposite party inspected the said plantain garden, but they could not cure the decease. The complainant has sustained a loss of investment of Rs.2,10,000/- because of defective supply of banana seedlings by the opposite party, no income could be derived by the complainant. The officials of opposite party had represented that thee would be not less than sum of Rs.200/- per plantain. Therefore, the complainant should have derived Rs.7,00,000/-. In this the complainant issued a notice on 17.11.2007 to the opposite party. That the opposite party received the said notice on 22.11.2007. But the opposite party has neither complied with the said notice nor have they issued reply notice till this date. There is deficiency on the part of opposite party which resulted in loss a sum of Rs.7,00,000/-. Due to the deficiency of service of opposite party the complainant has been caused great mental agony. For which, the complainant claims a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation, separately. Hence, the complainant claims compensation in total a sum of Rs.9,60,000/- by filing the complaint in C.O.P.No.33 of 2008 before the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri.

5. While pendency of the above complaint, the case was posted on 06.06.2008 and due to the non appearance of the complainant as well as his counsel, the Forum has passed the order that the complainant called absent and there was no representation too no steps taken yet. Not known in the absence of the complainant still interested in prosecuting the case