IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
MURSHIDABAD , AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC No. 202/2017.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission : Date of Disposal:
30.11.2017 21.12.2017 31.08.2018
Md. Humayun Kabir
Son of Amirul Islam
Of Railpara, P.O.& P.S. Sagardighi,
Dist.-Murshidabad
PIN-742226 …………… Complainant .
Vs -
Abdul Mohimen,
Prop. of M/S, Indian Alka Water Project
Vill. Ratanpur, P.O. Meghasihara
P.S. Sagardighi, Dist- Murshidabad,
PIN-742226 …........... Opposite Party.
Ld. Prabir Kr. Banerjee, Advocate ……… for Complainant
Ex-Parte ………………….……… for Opposite Party
Present : Sri Ashis Kumar Senapati …. ……… President.
Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty …. .…. Member.
Cont. ……….…. 2
= 2 =
J U D G M E N T
Chandrima Chakraborty, Member.
Shorn of unnecessary details, the case present before the Forum for adjudication may be summarized thus :-
In concise, the fact stated in the complaint, is that, the Complainant has a retail business of drinking water as self employment for his livelihood and the Opposite Party is the manufacturer of packed drinking water in bottle and jar. The Complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 30,000/- only on 21.05.2016 , a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- only on 13.09.2016 and another sum of Rs. 14,400/- only on 03.02.2017 for supplying of water on receipt of proper ‘Money Receipt’ issued by the Opposite Party.
But after these payments due to some unknown reasons the Opposite Party had stopped supplying the drinking water towards the Complainant. The Complainant severally requested the Opposite Party for supplying the drinking water for running his business which was very much essential for his livelihood but the Opposite Parties paid no heed to that effect. Suddenly the Opposite Party had issued two cheques of Rs. 40,000/- only dated 08.03.2017 and Rs. 14,400/- only dated 09.03.2017 in favour of the Complainant to return his total deposited amount of Rs. 54,400/- only, but the said both cheques were dishonoured by the Bank with a report “Exceed Arrangement”.
Thereafter the Complainant informed the matter to the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party assured the Complainant that either the opposite Party would hand over the total amount or would further supply the packed water to the Complainant immediately but till date the Opposite Party had neither handed over the total money nor had supplied the packed water towards the Complainant,
Cont. ……….…. 3
= 3 =
rather had denied to refund any money towards the Complainant on 12.11.2017, what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant for which being victimized and harassed by the Opposite Party the Complainant has to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Party.
Despite service of the notice, the Opposite Party never appeared before the Forum in person and/or through any authorized representative / Ld. Advocate to contest the case by filing Written Version and thus the instant case has been heard ex-parte against the Opposite Party.
Point for Consideration
The point for consideration in the instant case is whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs, as prayed for, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the material evidences on record.
Decision with Reasons
In order to prove his allegation set forth in the complaint, the Complainant deposed in this case as sole witness by way of affidavit and also produced some documents in support of his case.
The main allegation of the Complainant against the Opposite Party is that, in spite of payment towards the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party had neglected and/or deficient to provide the proper services towards the Complainant by neither supplying the drinking water as agreed for nor refund the paid money as security deposit.
Cont. ……….…. 4
= 4 =
On overall evaluation of the argument by the Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Complainant and perusing all the material documents in record, it is evident that, the Complainant has a retail business of drinking water as self employment for his livelihood and the Opposite Party is the manufacturer of packed drinking water in bottle and jar and the Complainant had hired the services of the Opposite Party on payment of security deposit.
It is revealed from the photocopies of the documents filed by the Complainant that the Complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 30,000/- only on 21.05.2016 , a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- only on 13.09.2016 and another sum of Rs. 14,400/- only on 03.02.2017 as security deposit towards the Opposite Party for supplying of water for which the Opposite Party had duly issued proper ‘Money Receipts’ in favour of the Complainant.
But the Complainant alleged that after these payments due to some unknown reasons the Opposite Party had stopped supplying the drinking water towards the Complainant. The Complainant severally requested the Opposite Party for supplying the drinking water for running his business which is very much essential for his livelihood.
From the photocopies of the documents filed by the Complainant it is manifestly evident that the Opposite Party had issued two cheques of Rs. 40,000/- only dated 08.03.2017 and Rs. 14,400/- only dated 09.03.2017 in favour of the Complainant to refund his total deposited amount of Rs. 54,400/- only, but the said both cheques were dishonoured by the Bank with a report “Exceed Arrangement” which also is revealed from the photocopies of the documents submitted by the Complainant.
The Complainant stated that after informing the said matter to the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party assured the Complainant that he would further supply the water to the Complainant immediately, but till date the Opposite Party neither supply the water nor paid any amount of money towards the Complainant, rather the Opposite Party also denied to refund any money towards the Complainant on 12.11.2017 .
Cont. ……….…. 5
= 5 =
Moreover, all the allegations made by the Complainant were never challenged by the Opposite Party, even the Opposite Party never appeared to contest the case. Therefore, is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant.
Thus, it is crystal clear from the above discussion that the Complainant proved that the Complainant had paid an amount of Rs. 54,400/- only in total as security deposit to the Opposite Party in terms of their business to supply drinking water but the Opposite Party miserably failed to supply the drinking water and never refunded the paid money towards the Complainant which is definitely the negligence and/or deficiency in rendering service towards the Complainant.
So the unanimous decision of the Forum is that the Opposite Party is strictly liable to supply the drinking water for which he had received the said amount of Rs. 54,400/- only in total from the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’ or to refund the sum of Rs. 54,400/- only along with Rs. 5,400/- only, as interest, towards the Complainant within 45 days from the date of this ‘Order’.
Therefore, in the light of the above discussion it is finally and commonly decided by the Forum that the Complainant has successfully proved the case and is entitled to get relief as prayed for, and consequently, the points for consideration are decided in affirmative.
In short, the Complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
Cont. ……….…. 6
= 6 =
O R D E R
That the case be and same is allowed on contest against both the Opposite Parties with cost of Rs. 2,000/- only payable by both Opposite Parties jointly and severally within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
That the Opposite Party is directed to supply the drinking water for which he had received the said amount of Rs. 54,400/- only in total from the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
That failure to supply the drinking water within aforesaid period the Opposite Party is further directed to refund the sum of Rs. 54,400/- only along with Rs. 5,400/- only, as interest, towards the Complainant within 45 days from the date of this ‘Order’.
That the Opposite Party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- only to the Complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony within 45 days from the date of this ‘Order’.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Parties within a period of one month from the date of this order, the default Opposite Parties shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day, from the date of this order till full satisfaction of the decree, which amount shall be deposited by the said default Opposite Parties in the State Consumer Legal Aid Fund.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
