The case of the complainant in a nutshell is that the complainant in order to construct his house at Bainchigram made an oral agreement with the O.P. / Ajmol Hossain to purchase margosa wooden frame and deck from the op  and for this purpose the op took Rs.10320/- as per agreement as advance money from  the complainant and also gave receipt to the complainant.  The op/ respondent supplied the wooden frame and deck after 6 days from the date of agreement .After receiving the wooden frame it appears to the complainant that those wooden frames are made of unripe and rotten wood. After fixing the frames in the door and window the frames becomes damaged highly . The complainant states that when he complained the matter to the op , he misbehaved and refused to alter those frames.Later on  the complainant came to know that the op running his furniture shop illegally without hearing any trade license with the  intention to defraud the customer. The complainant states that the Intention of the op is  unwarranted . Therefore, the op / respondent is   bound to take back those frames and refund the purchase price of the ….. and the complainant prays for compensation  for trouble, harassment , mental agony and complainant also prays for damage caused to the complainant by the wrongful act of the op.

      The OP appeared in this case and contested the same  by filling written version. The op denied all the allegations made against him  by the complainant.   Op states and argued that the complainat could not  produce any agreement in support of her claim. The fact of the op ‘s case is that the op is a merely a day labour / carpenter and he only makes furniture. He has no connection of business of selling woods and states that on request the op accompanied the complainant  when the complainant brought the wood. The choice of the wood was in the hand of the complainant and the op states that  the case is not maintainable against the op.  the op in his written argument also states that he runs his business with valid license . He also states that he is a poor man and the complain  deficiency of service is totally false and fabricated  and argued that if there is any deficiency of service it will be on the part of the complainant. After ftting the frames the complainant raised objection and denied to pay the money to the op which was due to him the op states he lodged complain for non-payment of due amount . The op further states that he is merely day labour and runs his family by working as a carpenter. And prays before the Forum to dismiss the case with cost.

        Complainant files Xerox copies of payment  receipt  , evidence on affidavit and WNA. Op also files WNA.

        Points for discussions :-

1.Whether the Complainant  is a ‘Consumer’?

    2.    Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief?

    3     Whether the OP has caused  any deficiency in service ?

DECISION WITH REASONS

Point – 1.

                         The Complainant made an oral agreement  with the op and accordingly the op took advance money of Rs10320/- and gave a receipt to the complainant and stated the work of affixing frames in the windows. So the complainant is a consumer u/s 12 of C.P. Act  As the complainant purchased wooden desks and frames and windows for considered  from  the op which has already been paid.

Point  - 2 & 3.

                       Both the points are taken up today ther for easiness of discussion.

                        It is admitted fact that the complainant to construct the frames of the windows and doors of his house made oral argument  with the op and gave advance money of Rs.10320/- . But after fixing the frames the complainant saw due to low standard materials of woods .The complainant requested the op to alter those frames and decks but refused to do so. Therefore the complainant is entitled toget relief .  In regard to the point 3. The complainant submitted that the op supplied materials which are low standard and on repeated request by the complainant the op refused to alter the same. Therefore, there is deficiency of service on the part of the op.

                       So in view of the above discussion, the perusal of documents, complainant’s written version , evidence in chief etc. we are of the opinion that the complainant has proved his case and he is entitled to get relief.

                                                                            Hence, it is ordered

 that the Complaint Case 25 of 16 be and the same is allowed on contest.      

          The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant towards  compensation for mental agony, harassment, and pain.

          The op is also directed to pay 2000/- to the complainant towards litigation cost. All the above payment should be made by op to the complainant  within 30 days from the date of this order i.d. Rs.50/- per day shall be deposited by the op and that should be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Fund.

            Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary post for information & necessary action.