Haryana

Karnal

CC/605/2020

M/s Darshana Enterprises - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mitashi Edutainment Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Lajpat Rai Chuchra

12 Jun 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No.605 of 2020

                                                        Date of instt.23.12.2020

                                                        Date of Decision:12.06.2024

 

M/s Darshana Enterprises having their office at 1183 Sector-7, Urban Estate Karnal, through its GPA Shri Bal Kishan Gupta, resident of 779, Sector-6, Urban Estate Karnal.

 

                                                                   …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

Mitashi Edutainment Pvt. Ltd. 414-424, 4^th floor, Bhaveshar Arcade, LBS Road, near Shreyas Cinema, Ghatkopar (west) Mumbai-400086, through its Managing Director.

                                                                     …..Opposite Party.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.      

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr.  Suman Singh…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri L.R. Chuchra, counsel for the complainant.

                   Opposite Party exparte, vide order Dt. 15.12.2023.

 

                     (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant  (Vinkesh Mitttal son of Shri Hem Raj Mittal) was proprietor and was engaged in electronics business under the same name and style of M/s Darshana Enterprises. OP approached the complainant and offer franchise of service of their Electronics Products in Karnal city as well as in the vicinity of District Karnal. Complainant has shown interest to be a service provider partner of Mitashi’s product with the condition that the product shall be assigned to complainant through portal CRM (customer relationship Management) of the Karnal city as well as its vicinity and complainant will raise bill as per Chandigarh Branch office and payment shall be released within 15 days after the receipt of the bills and the OP  will not appoint any other service provider in vicinity of District Karnal as well as in the Karnal city. OP h as shared his portal CRM and started to assign complaint to complainant during May, 2018. Complainant has started the job of providing services to the consumers of OPs’ product in Karnal city as well in vicinity of District Karnal during June, 2018. The complainant has raised bills and OP has released the payment, which comes as under:-

Sr.no.	Billing period	Date of Billing	Amount of bill	Date of payment	Amount received	Difference
1.	June, 2018	11.11.2018	3481.00	13.02.2019	649	2832
2.	July,2018	11.11.2018	13570	13.02.2019	13570	-
3.	August, 2018	11.11.2018	4366.00	13.02.2019	4366	­-
4.	Sep, 2018	14.01.2019	8024	13.02.2019	8024	-
5.	Oct, 2018	14.01.2019	17140.00	13.02.2019	17140	-
6.	Nov, 2018	14.01.2019	21417	13.02.2019	21417	-
7.	Dec, 2018	14.01.2019	19588	13.02.2019	19588	-
8.	Jan, 2019	01.06.2019	12980	13.08.2019	12980	-
9.	Feb, 2019	01.06.2019	14190	13.08.2019	14190	-
10	March, 2019	01.06.2019	8791	13.08.2019	8791	-
11.	April, 2019	01.06.2019	10532	Pending	0	10532
12.	May, 2019	01.06.2019	14072	Pending	0	14072
13.	June, 2019	10.07.2019	12744	Pending	0	12744
14.	July, Aug, 2019	01.12.2019	13010	Pending	0	13010
15.	Misc.18-19	10.07.2019	12833	Pending	0	12833
16.	Local purchase/ Repair		10000	Pending	0	10000
	Total		196738	76023	120715	76023

 

Before submitting the bills, complainant submits raw data to the OP and after getting the approval from OP bill were submitted to the OP for payment. During May, 2018 to August 2019 OP has never asked to complainant for the return of old parts being changed/replaced during the service provided by complainant to customer, inspite of number of times clarification was sought from the then BSI (Shri Raj Anand) during his visit at our premises as well as on phone call by complainant but every times OP has refused to accept old parts with the remarks  that “company has no such policies to collect old parts from service provider.” The complainant has requested number of times for pending payout as such in revert, OP has withdrawn the franchise from complainant without prior intimation and OP has appointed somebody a new service provider in Karnal city for the whole vicinity, resulting engineers/experts technicians working in complainant service team remained idle and their salaries were born by the complainant, due to illegal act and conduct, negligence and mismanagement of the OP. Now the OP is asking to deposit all the old parts from day first to August, 2019. As such currier agency of the OP has collected/lifted more than 80% major old parts from the premises of complainant and some of the parts remained negligible. The complainant is legally entitled to claim balance payment pending with the OP alongwith interest from the due date till its actual realization. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 16.08.2020 to the OP but it also did not yield any result. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.  Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OP did not appear despite service and opted to be proceeded against exparte, vide order dated 15.12.2023 of the Commission.

3.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of bills/tax invoice Ex.C1 to Ex.C27, copy of detail of bill from July to August, 2019 Ex.C28, copy of legal notice Ex.C29, postal receipts Ex.C30, General Power of Attorney Ex.C31 and closed the evidence on 26.10.2023 by suffering separate statement.

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

5.             Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant’s  firm has taken the franchise of OP and has become the service provider partner of Mitashi’s product. OP has shared his portal CRM and started to assign complaint to complainant during May, 2018. The complainant has raised bills and OP has released the payment. During May, 2018 to August 2019 OP has never asked to complainant for the return of old parts being changed/replaced during the service provided by complainant to customer. The complainant has requested the OP for pending payout but instead of paying the payment, OP has withdrawn the franchise from complainant without prior intimation. The complainant is legally entitled to claim balance payment, which is pending with the OP and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

6.             The onus to prove his version was relied upon the complainant. To prove his version, complainant has relied upon the documents copy of bills/tax invoice Ex.C1 to Ex.C27, copy of detail of bill from July to August, 2019 Ex.C28, copy of legal notice Ex.C29, postal receipts Ex.C30, General Power of Attorney Ex.C31. To rebut the said evidence produce by the complainant OP did not appear and opted to be proceeded against exparte. Therefore, the evidence produced by the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. Thus, it is well proved on record the act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, complainant is entitled for Rs.76,023/- alongwith interest, compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment and towards the litigation expenses.

7.             Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to pay Rs.76,023/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 23.12.2020 till its realization. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on account of mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expense. This order shall be complied within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:12.06.2024                                                                    

                                                                President,

                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                   Redressal Commission, Karnal.      

 (Vineet Kaushik)       (Dr. Suman Singh)    

                     Member                   Member