Absence of evidence of negligence led to dismissal of the complaint under the Consumer Protection Act.

1. In the present matter complainant has been remaining absent since long time. Looking to the record of this case learned Advocate Mr. M.K. Dudhiya has filed the present Complaint on behalf of the complainant before this Commission at the relevant time but on date 19.7.2019 ld. Adv. Mr. Dudhiya has retired from the present Compliant by giving written notice to the complainant but thereafter also complainant has never been present before this Commission on various dates of hearing. Thereafter even after issuing various notices to the complainant by this Commission, all the notices were returned with LEFT marked on the envelope by Postal Department and till date neither the complainant nor any Advocate remained present on behalf of the complainant before this Commission.

2. Today when the matter is called out, no one remained present for the complainant and opponent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and looking to the old matter of the year 2013, as per S.13(2) (C) read with S.18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 it has been decided by this Commission to dispose of this matter on merit.

3. The present complainant - Mr. Chimanbhai C. Patel has preferred this Complaint under S.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for getting amount of Rs.78,00,000 with necessary amount for compensation and mental agony from the opponents for the monetary loss occurred to him due to the deficiency in service and negligence on the part of opponents.

4. The facts given rise to the present Complaint in nutshell are as under: It is the case of the complainant that the complainant is doing business of tobacco in the name and style of 'C.M. Patel' (Proprietary Firm). It is further the case of the complainant that complainant was approached by opponent No. 1 - National Bulk Handling Corporation Ltd. (NBHC) and they have explained complainant that they will help complainant in obtaining loan from nationalized bank against their stock of tobacco which is required to be stored at Warehouse and also assured the complainant that against pledging of this commodity, they will help complainant to get a good amount of loan at the lower interest rates and then further assured that they will take proper care of the commodity which is required to be stored at warehouse and such stock will properly looking after them and they will keep it up to date and informed complainant. It is further submitted by complainant that as complainant is in need of money, he has shown interest in obtaining the loan and NBHC has informed him that the Bank requires security against their loan and therefore the commodity is required to be stored at third party Warehouse in lock and key position and the keys for the same will be in possession of NBHC and Bank. It is further the case of the complainant that he has drawn the attention of the officer of NBHC that Tobacco requires regular monitoring and stock of it should be shaken at regular interval and if it will not done then the quality of the tobacco will be affected and tobacco starts deteriorating and also the officer of NBHC has assured him that they are having knowledge of everything about handling and monitoring of tobacco and also assured that they will do an agreement with him and they will describe their liability and services to be provided by them in the said agreement.

5. It is further the case of the complainant that relying upon the guidance and assurances given by officers of NBHC, he has decided to take loan against the tobacco and thereafter processing of the various documents of complainant through opponent No. 1 and 2, opponent No. 3 - SBI Bank was principally agreed to