DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. _135_ OF ___2017
DATE OF FILING : 9.10.2017 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: _23.5.2018_
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker & Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : Mr. Nirod Baran Mondal, C/o Nirod Baran Mondal (Adhayan), A.P Nagar (N), Jhilpar, Sonarpur, Kolkata – 150.
O.P/O.Ps : Banani Decorators & Electric, Proprietor: Parimal Mondal, Acharya Profulla Nagar ( Chandmari Jhilpar), P.O & P.S Sonarpur, Kol-150.
________________________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
The nub of the facts leading to the filing of the instant case by the complainant is that a pandal (20ft x 15 ft) was erected on the roof top of the complainant’s house on the occasion of obsequial rites (sraddha ceremony) of his wife. But, arrangement cannot be made in accordance with the terms of contract , as goes the allegation of the complainant. On the very day of Sraddh Ceremony, a cataract of rain came down and marred the entire programme. Everything went into topsy-tuny condition ; everyone including the guests and relatives had to leave the complainant’s house due to incessant rain. So, the complainant has approached this Forum with the prayer for refund of Rs.4000/- which was paid by him to the O.P and also for payment of compensation etc. Hence, this case.
The O.P made appearance in this case but has not filed any written statement herein, paving the way for exparte hearing of the case.
Upon the averments of the parties following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
The complaint is treated as Evidence on the petition filedby the complainant on19.2.2018.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :-
An agreement which was effected between the complainant and the O.P is filed herein . On perusal of the said agreement, it is found that the pandal which was agreed to be erected by the O.P was very small in size; the size was 20ftx15ft only. Here is no allegation levelled against the O.P that what was agreed to be supplied was not supplied to him by the O.P. A further perusal of the agreement reveals that there is an exemption clause inserted in the agreement. The exemption clause provides that the O.P is not liable for damage caused due to sudden natural calamity , violent storm, rain, flood etc. It is the version of the complainant that a cataract of rain suddenly came down that day and marred the ceremony of him. It is certainly an Act of God. An Act of God is a sudden incident, over which the human being has no control.
Regard being had to the exemption clause, we are of the opinion that the O.P is well saved by the exemption clause and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. This being so, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief or reliefs as prayed for from the O.P.
In the result, the case deserves to be dismissed.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is dismissed exparte against the O.P without cost.
Let a free copy of this order be supplied /sent to the parties concerned at once for taking necessary action.
President
I / We agree
Member Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
