Kerala

Idukki

CC/157/2021

Sheeba joseph - Complainant(s)

Versus

Binu M das - Opp.Party(s)

25 Jun 2022

ORDER

DATE OF FILING :09/11/2021

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 25^th day of June 2022

Present :

SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR PRESIDENT

SMT.ASAMOL P. MEMBER

SRI.AMPADY K.S. MEMBER

CC NO.157/2021

Between

Complainant : Sheeba, W/o Joseph,

Kannamparambil House,

Panamkutty Kara, Konnathady Village,

(By Adv.V.K.Shaji)

And

Opposite Party : Binu M. Das

Mushroom Research and Development Organisation,

Chengannoor P.O., Alappuzha.

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

Facts of the complaint are briefly stated hereunder:-

.
1 . Complainant is a housewife. Opposite party is an owner of an institution which is named as “Mushroom Research and Development Organisation”

 

2 . Based on the advertisement issued by opposite party regarding the Scientific Mushroom Cultivation in 'Karshakasree Magazine', complainant contacted the opposite party through phone then, they agreed that the building works except floor mushroom seeds for Rs.1,65,000/- for stating its Agriculture.

 

3 . For that, complainant has transferred Rs.10,000/- as 1^st instalment through SBI, Adimaly Branch on 04/01/2017, 30,000/- as 2^nd instalment on 15/01/2017 through the same bank, Rs.45,000/- as 3^rd instalment through Canara Bank, Murikkassery branch on 09/03/2017, 40,000/- as 4^th instalment through the same bank on 15/01/2018 and Rs.40,000/- as 5^th instalment through the same bank on 16/01/2018 to opposite party's account. Thus, complainant has transferred full amount at the said time by opposite party. At that time, opposite party had assured that after the payment of 5^th instalment, within 3 months, they would complete all

(Cont.....2)

-2-

works for starting Mushroom agriculture and also training would be given to complainant.

 

4 . But, roof work of the building was not completed by opposite party within the said 3 months after payment. Then, complainant demanded opposite party to start mushroom agriculture without delay. But, opposite party needed additional 3 months time to start it. Thereafter, Covid Pantamic situation happened and thus the work was not started by the opposite party.

 

5 . Later, opposite party also agreed on 15/05/2021 that mushroom agriculture would start within 3 months after completing the building works. But, they neither completed building works nor had started Mushroom agriculture as they had assured. Since July, they refused among phone of complainant. Then, complainant searched about the institution of opposite party and then he was informed that these opposite party has obtained much amount from many persons under the pretext of starting mushroom agriculture, fraudulently.

 

6 . Complainant is a Consumer of this opposite party. Opposite party has received Rs.165,000/- from complainant but they didn't give service which was assured by them. These acts are the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. Hence, complainant prayed for the following reliefs.

 

(a) Opposite party may be directed to refund Rs.1,65,000/- along with 12% interest.

 

(b) Opposite party may be directed to pay Rs.8000/- as cost of litigation and travelling expenses and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation.

 

7 . Commission has served notice to opposite party. But they did not appear before the Commission. Also opposite party has not filed written version against the complaint. Therefore, the case was posted for complainant's evidence.

 

8 . Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced 6 documents. Complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents were marked as Exts. P1 to P6. Opposite party had not appeared before the Commission at any time.

(Cont.....3)

-3-

No written version filed by opposite party. Heard counsel for complainant.

 

9 . The points which arise for consideration are:-

 

(a) Whether the complaint is barred under section 69 of the act?

(b)Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

1. 1. 100. If so, what reliefs are entitled to complainant.

 

Point No.1

 

10 . Complainant had filed an earlier complaint on 29/09/2021 before this Commission. But it was rejected on the ground of delay to file the complaint. Later, complainant filed new complaint on 08/11/2021. But she has not filed appeal or revision against the rejection of first complaint. In the new complaint, she has not reported about the old complaint and its rejection. But, it is deposed in the examination that she had disclosed all matters with respect her complaint to her counsel. She is a housewife and not well educated. Therefore she is not able to understand the procedure prescribed. Hence, she has filed this new complaint as per the direction of her counsel. In this new complaint, it is reported that opposite party had assured on 15/05/2021 they would start the mushroom cultivation within 3 months, however complainant was not contacted by opposite party since July 2021. This was not submitted in first complaint. Hence first complaint was rejected as time barred. Since the complainant is not well educated, she was not aware that factum of rejection of earlier complaint had to mention in 2^nd complaint. Hence, it was not stated in 2^nd complaint. A second complaint can be maintained on same cause of action as it is within time. Cause of action has arise on July 2021 and this complaint is filed within the period of limitation. Point N.1 is answered accordingly.

 

Point No.2 and 3

 

After receiving the notice from the Commission, opposite party has neither appeared at any time nor filed written version. After perusing chief affidavit and the documents which were produced by complainant, we have found that complainant totally transferred Rs.1,65,000/- to opposite party. These amounts was transferred through banks by complainant. It is seen in Ext.P1 that opposite

(Cont.....4)

-4-

party published an advertisement regarding high-tech mushroom training and other

detailed information about its agriculture. According to complainant, she believed

the advertisement and expected self earnings from the said agriculture. Therefore, she transferred payment to opposite party for starting it. But, after receiving the payment, opposite party didn't start the building works for mushroom agriculture. These acts amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Opposite party has neither filed written version nor challenged the case documents and which were produced by complainant. Complainant has proved the case against this opposite party. Hence, we find that complainant is entitled for the refund of money transferred by her for starting mushroom agriculture, which is Rs.1,65,000/- along with 12% interest from the date of petition, a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost coming Rs.3000/-. Point No.2 and 3 are answered accordingly.

 

In the result, complaint is allowed as hereunder.

 

Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.1,65,000/- along with 12% interest from the date of petition till payment/realisation and also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.3000/- as litigation cost to complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of order, failing which compensation amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of order, till its realisation.

 

Pronounced by this Commission on this the 25^th day of June 2022.

 

 

Sd/-

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

Sd/-

SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

 

(Cont.....5)

 

-5-

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 - Sheeba

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 – Paper cutting

Ext.P2 – Pay in Slip – State Bank dated 04/01/2017

Ext.P3- Pay in Slip – Canara Bank dated 15/02/2017

Ext.P4- Receipt – Canara Bank dated 09/03/2017

Ext.P5- Pay in Slip- State Bank of India – dated 15/01/2018

Ext.P6 – Receipt – Canara Bank dated 16/01/2018

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

 

 

Forwarded by Order

 

 

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR