1. CLAIM FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 10,98,000/- Haji Riaz, the claimant filed a claim for recovery of Rs. 10,98000/- against the respondent Al-haq Zarai Industry through proprietor Mian Usman and Brothers U/s 28 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005.
2. The claimant Haji Riaz Purchased one potato planter and one unit of potato digger worth of Rs.
3. 105000/- and 1,18,000/- on 24-07-11 and 24-07-11 respectively. A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid at the time of purchase of potato planter whereas, remaining price of Rs. 5000/- was not received by the respondent. The claimant alleged both agricultural instruments i.e potato planter and digger had manufacturing defects due to which the potato crop sowed by him did not give requisite results and damage to his tractor was also caused. The claimant assessed his loss to the tune of Rs. 8,80,000/-. The claimant sent a legal notice to the respondent on 13-07-12 but the respondent did not reply to it. The claimant prayed that he was entitled to a decree of original price of defective agricultural instruments and compensation total Rs. 10,98,000/- including fee paid to counsel.
4. The respondent was served in-accordance with law but despite publication in press, no one turned up on his behalf. Therefore, he was proceeded against exparte.
5. In exparte evidence, Haji Raz Ahmad, claimant appeared in witness box as Pw-1. He also produced Muhammad Shaban Pw-2. The documentary evidence of the claimant comprised of receipt dated 16-07-11 Ex-P1, receipt dated 24-07- 11 Ex-p2, legal notice Ex-P3, postal receipt Ex-P4 and fee certificate of counsel Ex-P5.
6. The claimant Riaz Ahmad as Pw-1 reiterated facts incorporated in the claim. His statement was supported by Pw-2. The receipts dated 16-07-11 and 24-11-11 Ex-P1 and P2 respectively proved beyond any doubt that the claimant had purchased potato planter and potato digger from the respondent for a consideration of Rs. 10,5000/- and 118000/- respectively. The factam of issuance of legal notice to the respondent through Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Sabri Advocate Ex-P3 and postal receipt P4 also stand proved on record. According to fee certificate Ex-P4, the counsel appearing on behalf of the claimant received fee of Rs. 35,000/- from the claimant. All the aforementioned documents and oral statement available on record, if read together would prove that the claimant had purchased potato planter and potato digger from the respondent in lieu of proper receipts Ex- P1 to P2. However, on the point of compensation/damages, the evidence available on record was deficient. The claimant failed to bring on record to prove that he had purchased 180 potato bags and that the tyres of his tractor were fractured because of any overt act on the part of the respondent regarding manufacturing of defective potato digger and potato planter. This possibility cannot be ruled out that he might have sowed potatoes and after cutting the crop he could not have got the requisite results. In these circumstances, only tentative assessment of damage caused to the claimant may be made. Consequently I am of the view that the claimant should be granted damage/compensation not as claimed by him but to the tune of Rs. 50,000 only. This amount granted as damages/compensation may server the purpose of law. In addition to that, the claimant is also held entitled to get counsel fee counsel at the time of filing of the claim besides miscellaneous charges.
7. In view of my findings and reasons recorded above, the claim is accepted in terms that the claimant shall get price of potato planter in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One lac rupees), the price of digger in the sum of Rs. 1,18,000/- (one lac eighteen thousand rupees), counsel fee and miscellaneous charges Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- as damages/compensation. If the price of potatoes planter and digger is retuned to the claimant, the claimant would be duty bound to return the machinery in question i.e potato planter and digger to the respondents. The total decretal amount of Rs. 3,08,000/- (three lac eight thousand rupees) shall be paid within 30 days to the claimant from the date of passing of this order. Registrar of the Court is directed to send copy of this order to the respondent and Directorate of Punjab Consumer Protection Council in compliance of Act ibid.