DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

MUCHIPARA, BURDWAN.

Consumer Complaint No.27 of 2015

Date of filing:22.01.2015                                                              Date of disposal:31.07.2015

Complainant: Srinjoy Kumar Singha Roy, S/o.Late Rabindra Nath Singha Roy, resident of Vill.

                           & Post- Medgachi, P.S.-Kalna, Dist.-Burdwan, presently residing at “Rabindra

                           Villa”, P.O., P.S. & Dist.-Burdwan.

-VERSUS-

Opposite Party: 1. Mondal Nursery, service through its proprietor Subrata Mondal, having

                                   address at Satgechhia, P.O.-Satgechhia, Kalna Road, P.S.-Memari,

                                   Dist.-Burdwan.

                              2. Subrata Mondal, Proprietor of Mondal Nursery,  having

                                   address at Satgechhia, P.O.-Satgechhia, Kalna Road, P.S.-Memari,

                                   Dist.-Burdwan.

Present :  Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kr. Mandal

     Hon’ble Member :  Smt. Silpi Majumder

Appeared for the Complainant:  Ld. Advocate Sanyuk Banerjee.

Appeared for the Opposite Parties:  None.

JUDGEMENT

This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S 12 0f the Consumer Protection Act, Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs inspite of taking money from him did not bother to conduct the plantation work at his native place.

The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that he approached before the OP-1 for the purpose of some plantations of different kind of plants and trees at his native place. The OP-2 is the sole proprietor of the OP-1. The OP-1 for the purpose of conducting the said plantation work took Rs.15,000/- in total on two separate dates i.e. on 28.06.2013 he took Rs.5,000/- and on 11.07.2013 he received Rs.10,000/-. Although the OP had agreed to complete the work of plantation upon taking almost 50% of the total consideration amount of Rs.31,000/-, did not bother to conduct the work, even the OPs did not start the work. It was scheduled that after completion of the work the balance amount would be paid. As the OPs did not start the work the Complainant personally as well as through his Ld. Advocate had issued written notices on two occasions, but the OPs did not take any positive step in favour of the Complainant. Till filing of this complaint the OPs did not conduct any plantation work and according to the Complainant such inaction of the part of the OPs can easily be termed as deficiency in service as well unfair trade practice. As the OPs did not perform the work as agreed upon hence the Complainant is very much entitled to refund of the amount of Rs.15,000/- as paid by him. Not only that, he is also entitled to get compensation for unnecessary harassment and mental agony. Finding no other alternative he has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs to refund Rs.15,000/- as paid by him, Rs.50,000/- for delay, Rs.30,000/- towards compensation due to mental paid, agony and harassment and litigation cost of Rs.4,000/- to him.

Neither the OP-1 nor the OP-2 has been appeared before this Ld. Forum to contest the complaint either by filing written version or orally. It is evident from the record that two un-served envelops are existing in the file from where it is seen by us that the said envelops were issued in the names of the OPs, but the same have been returned with the endorsement as ‘unclaimed’ at the address of this Ld. Forum. As ‘unclaimed’ tantamount to good and valid service, hence it can safely be said the service of notice upon the OPs has been duly completed. As the OPs did not turn up, this Ld. Forum was pleased to fix the complaint for hearing exparte against the OPs. Accordingly we took up the hearing.

The Complainant has filed some documents and papers in support of his contention. We have heard the argument from the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and perused the papers and documents filed by him carefully. It is seen by us that admittedly the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- to the OPs for the purpose of some plantations of different kind of plants and trees at his native place. Further admitted fact is that the OPs inspite of taking money from the Complainant did not take any step to conduct the plantation work. As the OPs did not start the work the Complainant claimed refund of the amount as paid by him and in this respect written correspondences was also made on his behalf. Ultimately on 02.02.2014 the OP-2 had committed to refund of the paid amount of Rs.15,000/-in three installments in writing. But till filing of this complaint as no installment was paid by the OP-2, hence this complaint has been initiated. We have noticed that in the prayer portion the Complainant has prayed for refund of the said amount paid by him along with other certain reliefs. But as refund of money does not fall within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, we are not in a position to entertain the prayer as sought for. Prayer for refund of money lies only before the appropriate Civil Court.

Going by the foregoing discussion hence it is ordered that the complaint is dismissed ex-parte against the OPs without any cost.     

         (Asoke Kr. Mandal)        

             Dictated and corrected by me.                                                           President       

                                                                                                                    D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan

                     (Silpi Majumder)

                           Member

                   D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan

                                                                                (Silpi Majumder)

                                                                                    Member   

                                                                            D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan