- Juthika Pal,
- Subrata Pal,
Both residing at Vill- Nischintabasan,
P.O. Bahichard, Dist. Purba Medinipur. _________ Complainants
____Versus____
- Branch Manager,
Country Vacations [A Division of Country Club (I) Ltd.]
86B/2, Gajaraj Chamber, 1st Floor,
Topsia, Kolkata-46. ________ Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, Hon’ble President
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Order No. 15 Dated 15-07-2015.
The case of the complainants in short is that complainant no.1 had deposited Rs.15,000/- on 4.1.12 to o.p. at their office for obtaining a membership with o.p. Photocopy of the receipt has been annexed by complainant with the petition of complaint. Thereafter an agreement has been executed on the same day by and between complainant no.1 and o.p. Photocopy of the said agreement has been annexed by complainant with the petition of complaint. Complainants further stated that that they have deposited Rs.36,000/- through cheque to o.p. on 7.1.12. Thereafter, complainants instructed their bank in respect of stop payment of the said cheque and accordingly, the said cheque has not been encashed by o.p. since complainants instructed their bank as stated above. Upon this contention complainants filed this case with the prayers contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.
O.p. appeared in this case by filing w/v and contested the case. Ld. lawyer of o.p. stated that it is admitted position that they have deposited Rs.15,000/- on 4.1.12 and it is further admitted position that complainants deposited Rs.36,000/- through cheque in favour of o.p. but subsequently o.p. failed to encash the cheque since complainants instructed their bank for stop payment. Ld. lawyer of o.p. stated that it is not a case of deficiency of service since o.p. could not able to render any service to complainants since they have not paid the rest of amount as per the agreement executed in this regard on 4.1.12. Under such observations ld. lawyer of o.p. submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:
Upon considering the submissions of both the parties and on careful scrutiny of the entire materials on record we find that the receipt has been issued in favour of complainant no.1 by o.p. for Rs.15,000/- and the agreement was executed between complainant no.1 and o.p. in this regard. As such, it is very settled principle of law that complainant no.2 has no locus standi to file this case along with complainant no.1. Besides, it is fact that o.p. could not render any service to complainants since they have not paid the required amount in this regard. Under such observations, this Forum holds that this case cannot be entertained since complainant no.2 has no locus standi to file the case along with complainant no.1 because money receipt is in the name of complainant no.1 and agreement was executed between complainant no.1 and o.p. Under such observations and findings, this Forum constrained to hold that complainants have not substantiated their case and they are not entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
