In disputes involving cold storage, the burden of proof to demonstrate that the required temperature was maintained lies with the storage provider, as the consumer cannot prove the negative fact of temperature failure.

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

Date of Institution: 04.01.2019

Date of final hearing: 05.03.2026

Date of order: 05.03.2026

First Appeal No.14 of 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:-

1. HAFED Cold Store, GT Road, Taraori, District Karnal through its Manager.

2. D.G.M. HAFED, G.T. Road, Taraori.

3. The Managing Director, HAFED, Sector-5, Panchkula.

....Appellants

Versus

Ram Gopal, S/o Sh. Sapattar Singh, R/o Village Sambhli, Tehsil Nissing, District Karnal.

…..Respondent

CORAM:

SH. S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

SH. S.C. KAUSHIK, MEMBER

Present: Mr. Pardeep Panwar, counsel for the appellants.

Mr. Bhupinder Singh, counsel for the respondent.

Date of Institution: 13.11.2019

Date of final hearing: 05.03.2026

Date of order: 05.03.2026

First Appeal No.980 of 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Ram Gopal, S/o Sh. Sapattar Singh, R/o Village Sambhli, Tehsil Nissing, District Karnal.

....Appellant

Versus

1. HAFED Cold Store, GT Road, Taraori, District Karnal through its Manager.

2. D.G.M. HAFED, GT Road, Taraori.

3. Managing Director, HAFED, Sector-5, Panchkula.

…..Respondents

CORAM:

SH. S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

SH. S.C. KAUSHIK, MEMBER

Present: Mr. Bhupinder Singh, counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Pardeep Panwar, counsel for the respondents.

ORDER

PER: S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. Delay of 41 days in filing of First Appeal No. 14 of 2019 and Delay of 352 days in filing of First Appeal No. 980 of 2019 stands condoned for the reasons mentioned in their respective application seeking condonation of delay.

2. By this order; above mentioned two connected appeals are being disposed off. In both appeals; legality of order dated 22.10.2018 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal (In short “District Commission”) in complaint case No.336 of 2017, vide which complainant’s complaint has been allowed, has been questioned, separately.

3. Factual matrix : Complainant had sown potato crop in his field for earning his livelihood and a good quality potato was grown in the fields of the complainant and he has prepared a certified seed of potato for sowing in the next crop in his fields. Complainant has stored 400 bags of 50 kg each in the cold store of OP No.1. The said potato of 400 bags was deposited with OP No.1, vide lot no.125/150 dated 18.03.2017, vide lot No.158/135, 159/15 dated 20.03.2017 and lot No.238/100 dated 22.03.2017 against payment which was received by OP No.1 in advance. On 11.05.2017, complainant went to store of OP No.1 to inspect the said potato seed and noticed that the potato seed sprouted due to high temperature and have become unfit for sowing in the fields due to negligence on the part of OPs. He moved a complaint before the Managing Director, HAFED, Panchkula with copy to GM, HAFED Cold Store, Taraori, Chief Minister, Haryana for compensation, as he has suffered a huge loss due to the negligence of OPs. On 06.09.2017 complainant moved a complaint before C.M. Window and Horticulture Department, Uchani. On 11.09.2017 a Committee was constituted by the Horticulture Department and the said Committee after inspection of the said potato seed submitted his report that potato seed have sprouted to the extent of 60 to 65% and thus have become unfit for sowing. The complainant has suffered loss of the seed amounting to Rs.5,00,000/-. Complainant contacted the OPs several times and demanded compensation for the loss suffered by h