Punjab

Faridkot

CC/16/33

Shri Kant - Complainant(s)

Versus

Lal Shal Basher - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjit Singh Kakkar

25 Apr 2016

ORDER

        DISTRICT  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  FORUM,  FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :        33

Date of Institution :   1.02.2016

Date of Decision :     25.04.2016

 

Shree Kant s/o late Sham Lal s/o Raghubir Chand, r/o back side Tennary, Prem Nagar, Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

Bharat Bhushan s/o late Sham Lal s/o Raghubir Chand, r/o back side Tennary, Prem Nagar, Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

 

   .....Complainant

Versus

1. Lal Shal Basher r/o Gujjar Basti, Bali Charna Block, Satwari, Jammu-190003.+918493028785.

2. Shakeel s/o MD Basheer r/o V Shabir Shaw, Tehsil Budhal. District Rajouri (J&K).Ph+919596607297.

3. Musair Hussain Shaw s/o Shabir Shaw r/o Draj, Tehsil BUdhal, District Rajouri (J&K) Ph+918492874326.

                                       ....Opposite Parties(Ops)

   Complaint under Section 12 of the

   Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

    

   Quorum:     Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President.

   Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

   Sh P Singla, Member.

    

   Present:       Sh Ranjit Singh Kakkar, Ld Counsel for complainant,

                      Ops Exparte.

                               

    (Ajit Aggarwal , President)

                                                Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops seeking directions to Ops to replace the walnuts with superior quality of nuts or to pay Rs46,500+6700/-for financial loss suffered by complainant and for further directing Ops to pay Rs 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment etc besides Rs 15,000/-as litigation expenses.

   2                                          Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant no. 1 got service in Sutlej Gramin Bank and to give thanks to almighty, complainants wanted to distribute dry fruits to  Nirog Bal Ashram and among friends and relatives and for this they ordered Ops to supply them 350 Kg wall nuts and 75 kg apple crude. Ops offered wall nuts of premium quality at the rate of Rs190/-per kg totalling Rs.66,500/- and  dry apple crude of premium quality at the rate of Rs.50/-per Kg totalling for Rs.3,750/-. Complainants paid Rs15,000/-in cash and agreed to pay the remaining amount at the time of receiving the goods. Freight charges were also agreed to be paid by complainant. It is contended that as per demand of Ops, complainant deposited a sum of Rs 35,000/-in the account bearing no. 20143281262 of OP-2 with State Bank of India, Budhal through NEFT from account of complainant and then, goods were dispatched and sent through Safe Express to complainants. Wall nuts supplied by Ops were not of good quality as ordered by complainants, rather were of inferior quality and even could not be broken. Though these wall nuts were to be distributed in Nirog Bal Asharam and among his relatives and friends, but due to fear of bringing bad name, complainants did not distribute the same in Nirog Bal Ashram and among his friend circle and relatives. Complainants have made many requests to Ops to replace the said dry fruits, but they have flatly refused to do so and have told to do whatever we like. This act of Ops amounts to deficiency in service and has caused great harassment and mental tension to complainants, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and due to this complainants have prayed for seeking direction to Ops to pay Rs 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment etc  and Rs 15000/- as litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the complaint.

   3                                             The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 4.02.2016, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

   4                                   Notice containing summons and copy of complaint was issued to Ops through RC, but as per office report, notice did not receive back in the Forum. It is transpired that AD might have been mislaid in transit. Despite service of summons, nobody appeared in the Forum either in person or through counsel on date fixed and after several repeated calls and after waiting for a long time, Ops were proceeded against exparte.

   5                                          Complainants were given proper opportunity to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings. Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in exparte evidence affidavit of complainant no. 1 as Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 4 and then, closed the evidence.

   6                                               Ld Counsel for complainants vehementally argued that complainant no. 1 received government job and to express gratitude towards God, he wished to distribute dry fruits among poor children of Nirog Bal Ashram situated at Kotkapura and among his relatives and friends. For this purpose, he and his brother/complainant no.2 ordered Ops to supply them 350 kg wall nuts and 75 Kg dry apple crude. Ops offered Rs190 per Kg for wall nuts totalling Rs 66,500/- and Rs50 per Kg for dry apple crude totalling Rs 3,750/-. Complainant paid Rs15,000/-in cash and agreed to pay the remaining amount at the time of receiving consignment. It was agreed between parties that goods would be delivered at the residence of complainants and freight charges were decided to be paid by complainants. When complainant received goods, it was found that all dry fruits were of inferior quality and were not good as per standard ordered by complainants. Wall nuts were too hard to break and dry apple crude was also not of superior quality. Dry fruits were so inferior and of sub standard quality that complainants decided to not to distribute the same among children of Nirog Bal  Ashram and among their relatives and friends. Complainants had already told their relatives and friends that they would distribute dry fruits among them, but due to inferior quality of dry fruits supplied by Ops, complainants could not do so and all this caused not only financial loss to complainants but also lowered them in the eyes of their relatives and friends thereby caused loss of reputation. All this is deficiency on the part of Ops and has caused great mental agony and harassment to complainants. They have prayed for accepting the present complaint. Ld Counsel for complainants has stressed on documents Ex C-2, which is copy of billetee revealing freight charges of Rs.6,835/-paid by complainant to Safe Express for receiving dry fruit weighing 430 Kg from Lal Shah Bashir. Ex C-3 is the copy of folio of bank account pass book of complainant showing amount of Rs.35,000/- debited from his account for transferring the same in the account of Ops. Ex C-4 is the parcel containing wall nuts. It is further contended that under compelling conditions complainants have filed the instant complaint as they had no other alternative except to seek relief through this Forum.

   7                                     We have heard learned counsel for complainants and have very carefully gone through and perused the affidavits & documents placed on the file by complainant party

   8                                 After careful observation of the record placed on file and evidence led by complainants and from the aforementioned discussion, it is observed that complainants availed the services of Ops by placing an order for supply of dry fruits from them to their place. Copy of billetee Ex C-2 proves this fact. Complainants made part payment in cash and remaining payment on receiving the consignment. Ex C-3 produced by complainants has brought on record that complainants paid Rs35,000/- to Ops for crediting the same in the account of Ops. Ex C-4 is the parcel, clearly showing the fact that Ops sent dry fruits to complainants. On opening the parcels containing dry fruits, it was found that said dry fruits were not superior and were of inferior quality and even were not as per standard as ordered by complainants as these were inedible for human consumption. Complainants complained about this fact to Ops and requested them to replace the said dry fruits or to return the price paid by them to Ops, but all in vain as Ops flatly refused to pay any heed to the requests of complainant.

   9                                  We are of considered opinion that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainants have succeeded in proving the authenticity of their case through evidence produced by them. Hence, the present complaint is allowed and OPs are ordered to return Rs 45,000/- i.e the price of dry fruits alongwith Rs5000/-for freight charges paid by complainants. Ops are further directed to pay Rs 5,000/-to complainants for harassment and mental agony suffered by him alongwith Rs 2,000/-as cost of litigation. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order failing which, complainants shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to the record room.

   Announced in open Forum:

   Dated: 25.04.2016

   Member                Member            President (Parampal Kaur)         (P Singla)             (Ajit Aggarwal)