Date of Filing: 03.11.2020. Date of Disposal: 04.12.2024.
Complainant : RITA DUTTA MONDAL @ MITHU MONDAL, W/O UJJAL MONDAL, resident of House No 17, Sampriti Park, Bidhannagar, Durgapur, P.O Bidhan Nagar, P.S Bidhan Nagar, Dist. Paschim Bardhaman, PIN 713206, Ph No 9563864939.
-VERSES-
Opposite Party : GUINEA EMPORIUM, Represented by its
PROPRIETOR, having its office at Trinayani
Mansion (Beside Uco Bank), Benachity,
Durgapur, Dist. Paschim Bardhaman, Pin 713213
Present : Mrs. Lipika Ghosh -Hon’ble President in-Charge.
: Mr. Atanu Kr. Dutta. -Hon’ble Member.
Appeared for the Complainant:- Sri Suvro Chakraborty -Ld. Advocate
Appeared for the O. P. No.1 :- Sri Tapan Kumar Jash. -Ld. Advocate
On 03.11.2020 the complainant has filed this case u/S 35 of the C. P. Act, 2019.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that she is a house wife and her nick name is "Mithu". As such in the documents, so produce by the opposite party, the name of the complainant has been mentioned as Mithu Mondal and both the Rita Dutta Mondal and Mithu Mondal is same and identical person.
The complainant, being house wife, possesses some Stridhan which she acquired at the time of her marriage as gift. Among the stridhan the complainant wanted to polishing two bangles made of mixture of bronze and gold and she also wished to make one new bracelet. As such the complainant went before the opposite party on 17.02.2019. On consultation the opposite party intimated the complainant that for polishing the pair of bangles a sum of Rs. 250/- is required. As such the complainant deposited one pair of bangles made of bronze and gold, weight of which was 11-12 gm and at that time market price of that pair of bangles was Rs. 25,000/-.It is pertinent to mention here that the pair of bangles contained 8-9 gm of gold.
The complainant begs to submit further that along with polishing of the bangles the complainant also requested the opposite party for making one bracelet of gold. The Opposite Party informed the complainant that for making of a bracelet of gold 2.860 gm of gold is required and the complainant placed her order for making the same. For making new bracelet of gold and for polishing of the bangles the complainant made payment of Rs. 4,000/- in favour of the opposite party as advance and the opposite party issued bill no. 479 in favour of the complainant. In the said bill the opposite party admitted the receipt of the advance amount and also placed a date 20.04.2019 for making delivery of those ornaments.
The complainant begs to submit further that on 20.04.2019 the complainant visited at the shop of the opposite party but the opposite party intimated the complainant that for delivering the ornaments more time is required. The opposite party asked the complainant for visiting before them after one month. The complainant again visited before the opposite party after one month but in this time also the opposite party again took further time for making delivery. Thereafter the opposite party taking one after another time for delivering. Being frustrated the complainant compelled to send a letter on 29.07.2019 to the opposite party through Registered Post but in spite of receiving the said letter the opposite party neither gave any reply nor take any step to delivering the ornaments to the complainant. By getting no other alternative your complainant lodged complaint before the Consumer Affair's Department and lastly by getting no redressal the complainant compelled this present case.
The complainant begs to submit further that the complainant is a bonafide consumer of the opposite party and never done any act detrimental to the interest of the opposite party. In spite of that the opposite party in one hand failed to deliver the ornaments to the complainant and on the other hand the opposite party harassed the complainant by way of giving one after another date of delivery. Moreover in spite of receiving several verbal and written requests from the complainant the opposite party kept themselves mum. These conducts of the opposite party are deficiency in service and unfair trade practice due to which the complainant is suffering huge mental pain, agony and harassment and the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant is ready to make payment of remaining amount of Rs. 3000/- as and when the opposite party make delivery of the ornaments in her favour.
Under the above facts and circumstances , the complainant prays for directing the OP to deliver the ornaments (one pair of Bangle deposited for polishing and one bracelet made of gold of 2.860 gm. ) with a compensation of 1,00,000/- for mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation cost .
The case of the OP is that the present complaint is not maintainable in law, misconceived one and estoppel , waiver and acquiescence. The case is also bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. The complainant is not a consumer u/S 2(7) of the C.P. Act, 2019. The complainant suppressed the material facts and actual state of affairs for unlawful gain. As such, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief under law and equity.
The specific case of the OP is that in the documents so produced by the OP the name of the complainant has been mentioned as Mithu Mondal or that both the Rita Dutta Mondal and Mithu Mondal is same and one identical .
The OP further states that on 17.02.2019 the complainant gave one pair of old Pala on which there was 12 gold “Ful” in two Palas having two “Fuls” in every three Pat joint of one Pala , total weight was 1.54 grms and gold Pat of six pieces having three pieces in each Pala which weight was 1.00 gms to the OP for making new one with 1.500 grams of gold Pat and also ordered for making Pala “Chouka Mukh” against which deposited 2.860 grms of gold and ordered to make the said Mukh” of 4.00 grams and also deposited one pair of Bronze Bouti for polishing with water of gold and also deposited Rs.2000/- and the OP issued one estimate bill No.479 mentioning all those articles and their weighs and remuneration deposit of money and thereafter the complainant after being satisfied the contents in the said bill No. 479 , put her signature in the said bill. Thereafter, the husband of the complainant Ujjal Mondal came on 21.06.2019 to the OP and takes delivery of 12 Nos. of gold “Ful” from the OP weighting of 1.54 grams and gave receipt on the carbon process 479 and against on 28.06.2019 the husband of the complainant Ujjal Mondal took delivery of gold Pat which weight was 2.060 grams out of which complainant deposited 1.000 gms of gold pat mentioned in the Bill No. 479 after adjustment of deposit of gold pat of 1.000 grams the OP will get value of 1.060 grams of gold which the OP gave from his own fund and also will get Rs.500/- towards remuneration and Rs.100/- towards the price of Pala from the complainant but the complainant did not pay the said charges and the gold.
The OP further stated in the W/V that on May, 2019 Mr. Ujjal Mondal came to the OP and told that his wife was ill and lost the original Bill No. 479 and requested the OP to issue another Bill of estimate of the articles of previous bill No. 479. Accordingly, the OP issued another Bill of estimate of the articles of previous bill No. 479.
OP further submits that the complainant did not deposit one pair of Bungles to this OP for polishing nor gave any order for making bracelet as alleged vide Bill No. 479 but deposited 2.860 grams of gold for making “Chouka Mukh” of 4.000 grams and other items of bronze Bouty for polishing of water of gold and 12 Nos. of Pala Fuls of 1.54 grams and gold Pat of 1.000 grams vide Bill No. 479 and this OP has delivered 12 Nos. of Fuls weighting 1.54 grams and Pat weighting 2.060 gms to the husband of the complainant Ujjal Mondal on 21.06.2019 and 28.06.2019 who gave receipt o the Carbon Process of the Bill No. 479 and the complainant did not deposit cash of Rs.4000/- to this OP but deposited only Rs.2000/- (Rs.1500/- for Income Tax File and Rs.500/- in cash).
This OP again submitted that the OP is ready to deliver 1.800 grms of gold after adjustment of 1.060 grams of gold out of deposit of 2.860 grams of gold and Rs.1400/- after adjustment of Rs.600/- towards the remuneration for making Pat and price of Pala to the complainant . It is also mentioned in the said W/V that the complainant did not come to this OP after taking delivery of gold Pat on 28.06.2019 and the instant complaint petition is liable to be dismissed against the OP with costs .
Decision with Reasons
In order to prove the case, the complainant has filed evidence-on-affidavit along with some documents. The complainant also filed WNA. He also filed original documents under firisti on the date of hearing i.e. 29.11.2024.
The OP files W/V, evidence-on-affidavit, original documents under firisti, and WNA.
Perused the complaint, W/V, evidence-on-affidavit and WNA filed by both sides. We also perused the Xerox copy of original document submitted by both sides.
At the time of hearing, the Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that the complainant deposited 2.860g of gold and Rs.4000/- on 20.04.2019 to the OP. The complainant also deposited one pair of Bauti for polishing but the same has not been returned to the complainant after polishing.
From the W/V of the OP, it is seen that that OP is ready to deliver 1.800 grms of gold after adjustment of 1.060 grams of gold out of deposit of 2.860 grams of gold and Rs.1400/- after adjustment of Rs.600/- towards the remuneration for making Pat and price of Pala to the complainant . It is also mentioned in the said W/V that the complainant did not come to this OP after taking delivery of gold Pat on 28.06.2019.
From the original bill No. 479 dt. 17.02.2019 in the name of Mithu Mondal submitted by the complainant, it appears that the complainant deposited 2.860g of gold on 20.04.2019 to the OP. The complainant also deposited one pair of Bauti for polishing. But original Bill so submitted by the complainant is hazy and no conclusion can be drawn from the said bill.
From the carbon copy of the bill submitted by the OP it is seen that as on 28.06.2019 the OP will get 1.060g of gold from the complainant. Mr. Ujjal Mondal, the husband of the complainant, collected some of the orders given by his wife by putting his signature on the said carbon copy of the bill.
From the version of the Ld. Advocates of both sides and from the original Bill No.479 dt. 17.02.2019 it is also seen that the Bauti of the complainant is still lying with the OP.
Considering the submission of both sides and the material on record, it is clearly established that the complainant is a consumer under the C.P. Act, 2019 and there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP according to the C.P. Act, 2019 .The Hon’ble National Commission, in India, held that technicalities will not be looked into very seriously while dealing with the consumer cases. So, the complainant is entitled to get relief and compensation for her mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation cost.
As a result, the case succeeds.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
that the Consumer Complaint No. 143/2020 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP but without any cost.
The OP is directed to refund to the complainant 1.080g of gold and one pair of Bauty which was deposited to him on 17.02.2019 for polishing, within 45 days from the date of this order.
The OP is also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation and litigation cost to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the parties on free of cost.
Let all the original documents filed by the complainant and the OP under firisti , be returned to them with proper receipt .
Member President-in-Charge
D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman D.C.D.R.C.,Purba Bardhaman
