Advocates:
['M/S V NICHOLAS', '', 'N E A DINESH', 'SOLE RESPT', '', 'GREEN EARTH BIOTECHNOLOGIES', 'LTD A JAGANI INDUSTRIAL ARE', 'BANGALORE', '', 'M/S O PADMAPRAKASH', 'R SRINIVAS', 'FOR SOLE RESPT']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 29.07.2016

PRONOUNCED ON : 04.11.2016

CORAM

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN

CRP.NO.3935 of 2008

B.Nagaraj

… Petitioner

--Vs--

Green Earth Biotechnologies Limited,

14-A, Jagani Industrial Area,

Anekal Taluk, Bangalore – 562 106.

… Respondent

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, against the order of the District Consumer

Disputes Redressal Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri dated Nil in

Unnumbered Application S.R.No.369 of 2008 in C.O.P.No.33 of 2008.

Petitioner : Mr.V.Nicholas

Respondent: Mr.D.Padmaprakash

O R D E R

2

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

exparte 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

3

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

4

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 deficienc