This is a complaint filed by one Smt. Prity Roy Chowdhury, W/o Sankar Prasad Roy Chowdhury against Mr. Mihir Dey, praying for a direction upon the OP to supply the goods as per order; alternatively, return the advance money amounting to Rs. 21,000/-and to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation.

Facts, in brief, are that the Complainant, for her personal requirement and for the residential building, placed an order for grills, sliding windows, iron collapsible gate etc. to the OP on 04-12-2012.  Total cost of the ordered goods were Rs. 90,000/-.  It is stated that, she paid Rs. 10,000/- on the date of placing order itself, i.e., on 04-12-2015 and further sum of Rs. 11,000/- was paid through two cheques bearing nos. 290962 and 290963 on 17-12-2015 and 02-01-2016, respectively.  Although the OP promised to deliver the goods within 10 days from the date of order, i.e., by 14-12-2015, allegedly, he is sitting tight on her order.  It is stated that the Complainant visited the working place of the OP several times and requested him to execute the order, but to no avail.  In fact, the OP even did not honour his written commitmernt that he made to the Complainant on 08-02-2016.  Hence, the case.

On the basis of such facts, the case was admitted and notice served upon the OP on 14-05-2016, but for some obscure reasons, the OP skipped the present proceedings and as such, the case was heard ex parte.

Decision with reasons

Complainant filed Affidavit-in-Chief reiterating the facts stated in the complaint petition.  She also filed a brief Notes of Argument.

In support of her claim, Complainant submitted photocopies of some documents, viz., Quotation issued by the OP, acknowledging therein receipt of payment for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, bank pass book, undertaking executed by the OP on 08-02-2016.

The documents, as noted hereinabove, sufficiently prove the bona fide of the claims made by the Complainant.  Besides, insofar as the authenticity of the documents on record remain unchallenged/unrebutted, we see no reason whatsoever to disbelieve the contention of the Complainant.

On a thoughtful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, there seems remote possibility of the OP delivering the ordered items to the Complainant.  Accordingly, we feel, an order to refund the advance money paid by the Complainant to the OP would serve the object of justice.  Besides, taking into consideration the gross deficiency in service on the part of the OP, we deem it fit and proper to award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation in favour of the Complainant.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

that CC/194/2016 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OP.  OP is directed to return Rs. 21,000/- to the Complainant, i.d., the amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. after expiry of two months.  That apart, the OP shall also pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the Complainant within the afore mentioned stipulated period.