BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Complaint Case no. 363 of 2021
Date of Institution: 27.12.2021
Date of Decision: 15.06.2023.
Ram Singh son of Shri Manphool, resident of village Jandwala, Tehsil Mandi Dabwali, District Sirsa.
………Complainant.
Versus
Gurdass Singh son of Shri Mehema Singh, C/o Baba Brick Company (BBC), Sangria Dhaba Road, Village Dhaba Tehsil Sangria, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).
……… Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR………. PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………..MEMBER
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Ramesh Bishnoi, Advocate for complainant.
Opposite party already exparte.
ORDER:-
In brief, the case of complainant is that opposite party (hereinafter referred as OP) is running brick kiln. The complainant met with op in order to purchase bricks for construction of his house and rate of bricks was settled at Rs.3700/- against 1000 bricks for the A Quality (1 number) bricks. The complainant placed an order of 60000 bricks and as per instructions of op complainant also made payment of Rs.2,20,000/- in the account of father of op through Google Pay vide account no. 05092413000129. The op has also made entries in their ledger/ account books and a copy of same was also supplied to the complainant. It is further averred that bricks supplied by op are not of A-grade rather the same are of B & C Grade (2&3 number) quality and in this manner the op has failed to complete the assurance made to him and has also cheated with him. It is further averred that op has wrongly and illegally made the entries in the khata book of the op of 60000 bricks while on 30.05.2021 only 2500 bricks were supplied by op to the complainant and op has wrongly and illegally by manipulating the entry in the records has shown that op has supplied 5000 bricks to the complainant. It is further averred that till today only 57500 bricks have been supplied by op to the complainant and 2500 bricks are still pending against op. Moreover, the rate of Rs.3700/- was settled between them against 1000 bricks for A grade bricks and not for B&C grade but op has supplied B&C grade bricks. The complainant contacted the op many times and requested the op to change the said bricks but op always gave false assurance to him and always put off the matter with one pretext or the other and now op has finally refused to change the bricks which are lying with the complainant as waste material and has also refused to supply remaining 2500 bricks to the complainant. It is further averred that such act and conduct of the op amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service due to which complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment and mental agony. The complainant purchased the bricks with money which was earned by him by putting his unflagging efforts for the construction of his dream house and as such op is legally bound either to replace the bricks or to refund the amount paid by complainant and further op is also liable to refund the amount of pending 2500 bricks. That a legal notice to the op was also got served by complainant on 19.08.2021 but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party through registered cover but none appeared on behalf of op despite delivery of notice and as such op was proceeded against exparte.
3. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13.
4. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have perused the case file.
5. The complainant has alleged that opposite party has supplied 57500 bricks till date against the order of 60000 bricks whereas he has already received amount of Rs.2,20,000/- of 60,000 bricks from the complainant and the bricks supplied by the op to the complainant are also of B&C grade whereas op charged the amount of Grade A bricks. According to the complainant, op has also wrongly and illegally manipulated the entry in the record and has shown that on 30.05.2021, 5000 bricks were supplied to the complainant whereas on that date only 2500 bricks were supplied to him. The complainant has also placed on file transfer entries of the amounts in the account of father of complainant as Ex.C7 to Ex.C12, which proves the fact that total amount of Rs.2,20,000/- has been transferred in the account of father of op by the complainant. However, complainant has not placed on file any report of the Civil Engineer or any other expert person/ competent authority to prove the fact that the bricks supplied by the op are of grade B & C and are not of grade A type. The complainant has not placed on file any laboratory test report in this regard. Neither the sample of the bricks was sent by the complainant to any laboratory nor complainant himself applied for sending the sample of the bricks for analysis to the Govt. authorized laboratory. In absence of any authentic report regarding quality of the bricks, it cannot be determined that bricks are of grade B and C quality. So, there is no evidence on record regarding quality of the bricks and in absence of any authentic report in this regard, the only version of complainant cannot be relied upon since same has not been proved on record as per requirement of the Act. The complainant has also failed to prove on record through any cogent and convincing evidence that op has supplied less bricks to the complainant and as such complaint of complainant deserves dismissal.
6. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 15.06.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
