1

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, HON’BLE DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, HISAR

COMPLAINT NO. _______/2018

NHARAT SINGH ALIAS BHATHA (AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O TELU RAM
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BITHMARA, SUB TEHSIL, UKALANA, DISTRICT-HISAR,
MOB: 9466637695

…COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

M/S MAHESH AGRICULTURE STORE, THOUGHTR ITS PRPRIETOR, UKLANA MANDI,

DISTRICT HISAR, (PHONE NOS.01693-233338& 011693-127)

…RESPONDENTS

WRITTHEN STATEMENT AND OBJECTIONS FILED BY RESPONDANT IN THA

ABOVE MATTER

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the Complainant has filed the above mentioned complainant

under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 .The

Respondent No.2 denies the averments in the plaint seriatim except

those specifically admitted hereunder. The complainant has not

given correct facts to the court and twisted by giving false identity

as to facts of case. It is purposefully to avoid future adverse effects

from this false complaint. The answering Respondent No.2 most

 2
respectfully submits that the present suit of the complainant is

devoid of any material basis or merit and fails to predict out the

existence of any cause of action against the answering Respondent

No.2. The following preliminary objections and the reply on merits,

which are taken without prejudice to each other, duly establish the

grounds for dismissal of the instant suit without further indulgence

by the Hon’ble Court.

PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS

2. That the complainant is not maintainable either on fact or on law.

3. That the Respondent No.2 is a duly Registered Company and

running a business under the name and style “ M/s. Oswal Krishi

Rasayan Export Pvt. Ltd.” and engaged in the business of

manufacturing and selling of Agrochemical products throughout

India. That the company has considerable market goodwill in the

field of agrochemical manufacturing. Thus the matter raised

relevant questions on the maintainability of the present Complaint

before this Hon’ble Court which requires the consideration of this

Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressed Forum as a

preliminary issue.

4. That the Respondent No.2 sold the materials to Respondent No 1.

But it is not correct the quality of materials was not good. That the

result of product may be up- down because it’s dependent on

 3
various factors .In Agriculture Department report prepared by the

department mention in the complaint and stated that after spraying

weed (khatpatwar) killer in the wheat crop. Khatpatwar (weed) did

not vanish at all. it is clear that there did not working in an manner

on that complainat 7 ½ acres plants and in the report prepared by

the Agriculture Department it is clear that khatpatwar (weed) did

not vanish at all. It means that weed said works on the field. It is

evident that no defects in the products because Respondent No.1

did not told about the any defects and he did not send any

complainant regarding the same. It is only tactic that because

Complainat want money back to Respondent No1, so complainant

has been claiming that the products of Respondent No.2 is not

good, is only tactics so Complainant can want the payment back to

Respondent No1. Furthermore Respondent No. 1 did not tell to

Respondent 2 about the products is bad quality.

5. The Respondent No.2 denies the averments in the plaint seriatim

except those specifically admitted hereunder. The complainant has

not given correct facts to the court and twisted by giving false

identity as to facts of case. It is purposefully to avoid future adverse

effects from this false complaint.

 4
PARAGRAPHWISE REPLY

a. That the contents of paragraph 1, 2, 3 of the plaint need no reply.

b. That as to the paragraph 4 of the plaint it is submitted that the

address stated in the cause title regarding this respondents No.2

not having full description and it is incomplete facts of the matter.

That the contents of paragraphs 4 of the plaint are denied for want

of knowledge. This respondent No.2 has in no way express any

helplessness to the complainant.

c. That as to the paragraph 5 of the plaint it is submitted that the

Respondent No.2 not denied that the on 11.01.2018 products

may be purchase by the Respondent No.1 but however Respondent

No 2 give any clarification about the selling product by the

Respondent No.1.

d. That the contents of Paragraph 6 are a matter of fact and are

denied for want of knowledge. The answering Respondent No.2 has

no knowledge about the allegations made in the paragraph under

reply and the Complainant have not a proof to the allegations

made against the Respondent No.2.However this following

clarification is given regarding wheat crop in 7 ½ acres of

complaint land. This is misconceived to file this case.

e. That the contents of paragraphs 7 of the plaint are denied for want

of knowledge this Respondent No.2 is in no way responsible for the

 5
complainants expenses or sufferance also respondent No.2 not

aware with the complainant 7 1/2 acres of wheat crop.

f. The content of paragraph 8 of the plaint are denied for want of

knowledge to this respondent No.2 .This respondent No.2 is order

of the products, respondent No.2 had supplied to the Respondent

No.1 but it is not correct the quality of materials was not good. It

is true that the result of the product may be up-down because its

dependant on many factors. It is evident that no defects in the

products because Respondent No.1 did not told about the any

defects and he did not send any complaint regarding the same and

respondent No.2 admitted that product supplied as a request of

Respondent No.1. That the Respondent No1, having the business

relationship with respondent No.2, Respondent No.1 used to

purchase weed (kharpatwar) and other chemical product from

Respondent No.2.

g. That the contents of paragraphs 9 of the plaint are denied for want

of knowledge.

h. That the contents of paragraphs 10 of the plaint are denied for

want of awareness that now complaint has put upon the

allegations to respondent No.2. It is manifest that no defects in the

products and made illegal statement against him but it is

adequately clear that complainant to the levelling of false and

baseless allegations against respondent and to harass respondent

 6
and complainant not given any flash in sequence to respondent

No.2. It is effect if Complainant actions have resulted in misleading

visitors to Respondent No. 2 products and its functionality thereby

substantively affecting the reputation and goodwill that

Respondent No. 2 has earned through years of expertise and

service.

i. That the contents of paragraphs 11 of the plaint are denied that

the amount sent by complainant is wrong hence no question arise

to make a payment of Rs. 99,770/- with interest to complainant.

While due to unprofessional behavior from respondent No.2,

suffered huge losses because the numbers given to the distributors

for business purpose but due to lack of proper service respondent

No.2 failed to receive business hence complainant are liable to pay

compensation to respondent No.2. Its functionality thereby

substantively affecting the reputation and goodwill that respondent

has earned through years of skill and service.

j. That the contents of paragraphs 12 of the plaint are denied for

want of knowledge.

k. That the contents of paragraph 13 of the plaint need no reply.

l. That the contents of paragraphs 14 of the plaint are denied for

want of knowledge visited by the complainant to Respondent No.1

store. It appears that Complainant has misrepresented the true

facts deliberately and has concealed its misdeeds and wrongs done
 7
against Respondent No.2. It is further stated that averments made

against Respondent No.2 in the subject Complainant are wrong,

frivolous and misconceived, hence they are denied.

m. That the Defendant denies the contents of paragraphs 15 of the

plaint for want of knowledge.

n. That the contents of paragraphs 16 of the plaint are denied that

the amount sent by complainant is wrong hence no question arise

to make a payment of Rs. 99,770/- with interest to complainant

That the facts and allegations filed by complainant in the above

complainant are not only false but it is deliberately made to gain

unlawful advantage over trivial issue of insignicant matter. Since

the case is not of so serious in nature.

o. That the contents of paragraphs 17 of the plaint are denied that

the complainant have no cause of action against the Respondent

No.2 lest the question of limitation. Hon’ble Court is having ample

power to impose maximum penalty over this false complaint and

Complainant may be dismissed treating complaint as false,

fraudulent abuse of process of court ulterior motive complaint with

heavy penalty contrary compensation to this opponent in this end

of justice.

p. That the Respondent No.2 denies the averments in paragraphs 18,

19, 20 of the plaint.

 8
PAYER

In the light of the above statements, submissions and explanations it is

submitted that no prayer of the complainant can be allowed. The Respondent

craves the leave of this Hon’ble Court to rely on the documents a list whereof

has been submitted by the Respondent. Therefore, it is humbly prayed that the

suit be dismissed with compensatory costs to the Respondent.

Filed by:-

AMARENDRA K. DUBEY

Advocates for Responde

501A USHA KIRAN BUlDING,COMMERCIAL COMPLEX,

AZADPUR, NEW DELHI-110033