IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/76/2013.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
22.05.13 09.07.13 02.11.22
Complainant: Bablul Islam
S/O- Late Hazi Osen Mondal, 388/1,
Chaltia, PO-Chaltia,
PS-Berhampore, Dist-Murshidabad
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Estate Manager,
West Bengal Small Industries Development Co. Ltd.
Silpa Bhavan,
31, Black Burn Lane, Second Floor
Kol-12
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Subhanjan Sengupta.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Parties : S.K. Rudra.
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Subir Sinha Roy………………………………….Member.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri. Ajay Kumar Das, Presiding Member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Bablul Islam (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Estate Manager, West Bengal Small Industries Development Corp. Ltd. (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The OP has many commercial units at Berhampore commercial Estate which is situated on plot No. 922, within Dist- Murshidabad, P.S-Berhampore, Mouza-Gar Berhampore. Out of those units one unit of No. D-28 had been allotted in favour of Sunil Kumar Mukherjee at a lease rent of Rs. 39,927/- for 30 years. The monthly lease rent was Rs.1,271.66 per month which was paid at a time for such 30 years. Sunil Kumar Mukherjee was running a shop thereon. When he was unable to run the shop then he applied to the OP expressing that he intended to surrender the shoproom in favour of the OP. Accordingly he gave a written application on 24.05.07. Then this Complainant expressed that he is intending to take the property on lease basis and he had filed a written application to the OP.
Thereafter the OP asked the Complainant to deposit sum of Rs. 54,000/- as salami and Rs. 9,982/- as transfer charge by a letter dated 25.08.11. The Complainant had paid the entire amount on 09.09.11 and receipts were issued.
Thereafter the Complainant on the very date requested the OP to execute a lease deed in his favour. But till today the OP is reluctant to execute such deed of lease. As per advice of the OP the Complainant took the possession of the shoproom on 10.09.11 and he is running his chamber as a doctor. The Complainant is a doctor by profession.
But the OP claiming the monthly rent of Rs. 600/- per month from July, 2007. But the Complainant has deposited the amount in the month of September, 2011 and then took the possession thereof. Before that this Complainant has no liability to pay any monthly rent since July, 2007 to October, 2011. But the OP illegally claiming sum of Rs. 44,141/- send a notice on 10.12.12. The notice has no basis. The OP can claim amount from Nov, 2011 and the Complainant is ready to pay the same. The Complainant wanted to pay the same. But the OP refused to receive the amount without taking the outstanding dues. So the Complainant send an Advocate’s notice to the OP stating his allegations which was received by the OP. But by a letter dated 19.02.13 they stated that they are entitled to get the claimed amount. Then on 03.05.13 by a notice they threatened to evict the Complainant from the shop. The OP without executing any deed of lease in favour of the Complainant has committed wrong. Moreover they have received the amount of transfer charges. So there are deficiency of service on the part of the OP. So the Complainant is bound to file the Complainant. The amount claimed by the OP is excessive and without basis. The Complainant is not defaulter.
Finding no other alternative the complainant filed the instant case before the District Commission for appropriate relief.
Defence Case:
The OP, Estate Manager, West Bengal Small Industries Development Corp. Ltd files Written Version stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable. The OP has stated in his written version that the Complainant took settlement of the unit No. D-28 under commercial units at Berhampore after surrender of the previous owner in the year 2007 and on behalf of West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. Estate Manager served a letter No. SB-1088/4, Dated 26.06.2007 to deposit all the payments mentioned in the said letter to the Complainant. But the Complainant taking possession of the said unit No. D-28, did not pay any rent of the said unit to the OP. Due to non-payment of rent the OP served a notice upon the Complainant. But the Complainant have failed to comply the terms and conditions of the OP. That the OP further stated that the said Stall No. D-28 is in non-functioning from the end of 2011 till now.
On the basis of the complaint and written version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case:
Points for decision
1. Isthe Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
3.Whether the Complaints Case is bad for defect of parties?
4. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?
5. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1,2,3,4&5
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
The point to be noted is that the Complainant has not been taking any steps for long period. It is a case of the year 2013. Such being the position, the instant case is required to be disposed of on merit.
In the instant case, the Complainant prays for declaring that the notice dated 10.12.12, 19.02.13 and 03.05.13 sent by the OP to the Complainant are illegal and without any basis. It is the settled principle of law or that this District Commission has jurisdiction only regarding the determination of
- defect of goods.
and
- deficiency of service.
This District Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain any suit/case for declaration. The Complainant has further prayed for order directing the OP to execute and registered deed of lease in favour of the Complainant in respect of stall No. D-28 at Berhampore Commercial State situated a plot No. 922 within District Murshidabad place Berhampore, Mouza Gar Berhampore.
For the purpose of determining this issue, we have to determine whether the Complainant has accrued any interest in respect of the suit property by depositing money as alleged. But this Commission has no such jurisdiction to determine whether the Complainant has accrued any such interest as we have already stated that the District Commission has only jurisdiction to determine whether there is any defect of goods or deficiency of service.
No original money receipt has been filed on behalf of the Complainant. Moreover, this Commission is in the dark regarding the terms and condition of the lease executed and registered in favour of Sunil Kumar Mukherjee. This Commission is also in the dark regarding the terms and conditions for transferring the lease hold property from Sunil Kumar Mukherjee to the Complainant, Bablul Islam.
In view of the matter discussed above, we are of the view that the instant case is liable to be dismissed.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 22.05.13 and admitted on 09.07.13. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case is dismissed.
Fees paid are correct.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/76/2013 be and the same is dismissed on merit against the O.P. but without any order as to costs.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
