Judgment : Dt.2.8.2017
This is a complaint made by Mr. Susanta Mallick, son of Sri Chitta Ranjan Mallick, office : Block-GB, Plot-70, East Kolkata Township Project, P.S.-Kasba, Kolkata-700 107 against D. Basu, proprietor, Industrial Services, Office at 12, Bivek Park, Kamdahari, Garia, P.S.-Netaji Nagar, Kolkata-700 084, praying for directing the OP (a) to supply water storage tank (4K.L) Capacity, dia 1.675 m and length 1.83 M having venting arrangement, Manhole, with top cover of tank to be manufactured with 3 mm. thick SS-304 steel shell, having 5 mm. Bottom PLT as per drawing. All flanges will be of suitable with gasket, fastener etc. Bottom portion will be manufactured with 5 mm thk SS Sheet dish end having drain and valve fixing arrangement, suitable valve also will be fixed if given during fabrication work, leakage test together with Hydrolic Test at 7 kg/CM2, (b) to pay Rs.4,95,000/- to the Complainant which he paid for purchasing other machine, (c) to pay a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- to the Complainant, which was expensed already for water connection and repairing of the room where the tank will be stalled, (d) to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the Complainant due to pain and mental agony and unfair trade practice and harassment, (e) to pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost.
Facts in brief are that Complainant, a businessman, wanted to set up a new business for making mineral water and in order to get water storage tank from experienced person/company placed his requirement at the site of www.IndiaMart.com and came into contact with the OP who offered to manufacture Mineral Water Storage tank of four thousand litre capacity. On 8.9.2016 the OP mailed by offering to the Complainant for fabrication and supply of S.S.Steel storage tank of Dia 1.675 m approx and approx. height 1.83 m from ground level, having venting arrangement, manhole, with top cover of tank to be manufactured with 3 mm. thick SS-304 steel sheel, having 5 mm. bottom PLT as per drawing. All flanges will be of suitable with gasket, fastener etc. A supply, manufacture, assembly with of the SS storage along with supply of flanges, level gauge, GM Drain valve etc. as per drawing and bog leakage test together with Hydrolic Test at 7 kg/cm2 will be arranged. However, inspection can be done by the Complainant with a prior intimation. Without prior intimation no inspection will be allowed. Tank with all accessories (Manhole, venting, drain, drain valve with flanges inlet and outlet connection etc.) at a price of Rs.2,95,000/-. After negotiation between the Complainant and the OP, on 18.9.2016 OP again mailed as final offer by reducing the value of water tank at the new price of Rs.2,65,000/- including 20’ ft. labour work for water pipe line job with terms and conditions of delivery that within 3 to 4 weeks from the date of receipt of order along with 50% advance. Accordingly, Complainant paid Rs.1,00,000/- on 19.9.2016 to the OP by cash. Thereafter, the OP remained silent for a long period on account of his illness and on 30.11.2016 the OP requested the Complainant to visit at his workshop. Accordingly, the Complainant visited the workshop of the OP and noticed some materials relating to water storage tank are lying and on 1.12.2016 a sum of Rs.65,000/- had been to the OP NEFT.
After some days the Complainant made contact and requested the OP either Mobile or sending representative but the OP was quite reluctant and took time in different pretext. The Complainant was in a worse position as he has already invested Rs.6,00,000/- for purchasing other machine and other works with regard to the storage tank where it will be installed.
On 30.12.2016 the Complainant came to know through Mail the OP demanded Rs.1,23,250/- including vat and loading and unloading charge. So, the Complainant contacted the OP over phone and requested him to fix a date for inspection. But the OP remained silent over this but, demanding rest amount.
On 11.1.2017 the Complainant got another Mail from the OP informing the Complainant to take the S.S.Tank by paying balance payment within 2 or 3 days otherwise Godown charges Rs.5,000/- will be charged per day. Thereafter, Complainant contacted the OP and asked him to fix a date for inspection of leakage test together with hydrolic test at 7kg/cm2 but the OP remained silent as before regarding the said test which was a condition during given offer dt.8.9.2016 and final offer dt.18.9.2016 that Leakage Test together with hydrolic test at 7kg/cm2 will be arranged.
Finding no other alternative the Complainant on 13.1.2017, 14./1.2017 and 16.1.2017 sent mail to the OP requesting him to ix a date for inspection. But, the OP remained silent.
Thereafter on 17.1.2017 one Mr. Samir Chandra, introduced himself as an Advocate-cum-Engineer asked the Complainant over telephone (No.7278175082) to visit at workshop of the OP for inspection and accordingly on21.1.2017 the Complainant visited the workshop. But, neither arrangement for leakage test and hydrolic test were found nor Mr. Samir Chandra was present. So, the Complainant on 24.1.2017 mailed the OP to complete the said water tank as per final offer.
On 27.1.2017 the OP again mailed to the Complainant by demanding balance payment and asked to take away the water tank without test. At last the Complainant mailed on 24.2.2017 but of no use. So, Complainant alleged the OP did not fulfill the commitment as per OP’s mail on 18.9.2016 and as such the OP rendered deficiency in service after taking 50% of the total amount which amounts to unfair trade practice. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP did not contest the case. So, the case is heard ex-parte.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief and made argument.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the prayer portion, it appears that Complainant has prayed for direction upon the OP for supplying water storage tank of 4k.l capacity dia 1.675 m and length 1.83 m having venting arrangement, manhole, with top cover of tank to be manufactured with 3 mm. thick SS-304 steel shell, having 5 mm. bottom Plot as per drawing. All flanges will be of suitable with gasket, fastener etc. bottom portion will be manufactured with 5 mm thk SS Sheet dish and having drain and valve fixing arrangement, suitable valve also will be fixed if given during fabrication work, leakage test together with hydrolic test at 7kg/cm2. Further, Complainant has filed documents which reveal that those are down loaded from website www.industrialservicespc.com, Complainants have also prayed for payment of Rs.4,95,000/-. But, no receipt is filed to establish that Complainant had paid this money. Complainant has also prayed for payment of Rs.1,05,000/- which he has spent on water connection and repairing of the room. However, there is no evidence to establish this fact. Also in addition Complainant has prayed for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-. In our view, since the Complainant failed to prove the allegations of the complaint, the question of awarding compensation and litigation cost do not arise.
Hence ordered
CC/118/2017 and the same is dismissed ex-parte.
