IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                     CASE No.  CC/69/2019

 Date of Filing:                                Date of Admission:                   Date of Disposal:

   06.06.2019                                            18.06.2019                                 05.12.2023          

Complainant:   Mohammad Ali

                                S/o-  Late Abdulla Saroar Ali,

                                Vill- Sujapur,

                                P.O.- Raghunathganj,

                                P.S.- Raghunathganj,

                                Dist-Murshidabad.

                                PIN-742225

                                                                -Vs-

Opposite Party:  A.E. & S.Mo. WBSEDCL,

                            Raghunathganj C.C.C.,

                            P.O. & P.S. Raghnathganj,

                            Dist- Murshidabad,

                            Pin-742225

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                        :           Prabir Kumar Banerjee  

Agent/Advocate for the O.P.                                     :            S.S. Dhar

Present:              Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.     

                               Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

   Sri. ajay kumar das, presiding member.

   This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

One Mahammad Ali (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against A.E. & S.M. WBSEDCL (here in after referred to as the O.P.) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

The Complainant had applied for connection of his Grill factory and the O.P. gave connection to the Complainant. The Complainant had deposited Rs. 20000/- and Rs. 16,993/- as quotation money and security deposit respectively and subsequently due to incapability of the Complainant the said grill factory had been shut down. Thereafter the Complainant made an application for refund of the said security money to the O.P. on 16.07.2018, but the O.P. did not refund the said amount to the Complainant though the Complainant had approached several times to the O.P. Having no other alternative the Complainant approached to the O.P. on 20.05.2019 for refund of the said security money but the O.P. drove out the Complainant after assaulting and threatening to take necessary action against the Complainant.

Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed the instant case before this District Commission for appropriate relief.

Defence Case

After due service of the notice the O.P. is contesting the case by filing W/V contending inter alia that the O.P. issued a cheque of Rs. 11,725/- on 28.06.2019 and accordingly it was informed to the petitioner to collect the cheque vide Memo No. RCCC/Cash/83 dated 03.07.2019 but till date petitioner has not received the cheque from the O.P. So, there is no deficiency of service on the part of this O.P.

Points for decision

1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has the O.P. any deficiency in service, as alleged?

3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1, 2 & 3

 All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submitted that the Complainant had deposited Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 16993/- as quotation money and for security deposit respectively. The grill factory had already been stopped due to incapability of the Complainant and as such the Complainant prayed for the refund of the security money but the O.P. did not pay any heed to that effect.

Ld. Advocate for the O.P. submitted that the O.P. issued a cheque of Rs. 11,725/- on 28.06.2019 and accordingly it was informed to the petitioner to collect the cheque vide Memo No. RCCC/Cash/83 dated 03.07.2019 but till date petitioner has not received the cheque from the O.P. The photocopy of the cheque filed by the O.P. is lying with the record. So, there is no deficiency of service on the part of this O.P.

Considering the materials on record and keeping in mind the submissions advanced by both the parties we are of the view that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. The Complainant is entitled to get back Rs. 11,725/- from the O.P. if not received earlier. The case is required to be disposed of accordingly.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 06.06.2019 and admitted on 18.06.2019. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

 Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is                                                            

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/69/2019 be and the same is disposed of on contest against the O.P. declaring the Complainant is entitled to get back Rs. 11725/- from the O.P. if not received earlier. 

The O.P. is directed to issue a fresh cheque amounting to Rs. 11725/- to the Complainant if the Complainant had not withdrawn the said amount of Rs. 11725/- vide Cheque No. 304225 dated 28.05.2019 issued by the O.P.

Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

            President

               Member                                                                                                                  President.