DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. NO-381/2016
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
16.06.2016 22.06.2016 07.08.2018
Complainants :- 1.Sri. GopalDey, NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114
West Bengal.
2. Sri. Sunil Sen, B.T. Road Remide,P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas,
Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
3. Sri. KrishnapadaHaldar, C/o GopalDey,
NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
4. Sri. Lipan Sarkar, C/o GopalDey,
NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
5. Sri. Swapan Kumar Ghosh, C/o GopalDey,
NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
6. Sri. Samar Ghosh, NatunBastuhara Bazar,
P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
7. Sri. Bablu Das,NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114,
West Bengal.
8. Sri. Rabi Mondal, NatunBastuhara Bazar,
P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
9. Smt. Mongola Roy, Gokul Nagar,P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas,
Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
10. Sri. Debashis Das,NatunBastuhara Bazar, P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114,
West Bengal.
11. Sri. BimalSaha, 4, Deshbandhu Nagar Colony,
P.O.-Panihati, P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
12.Sri. LaxmanGhatak, Sodepur Bazar,P.S.-Khardaha
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
13. Sri. T.K. Prosad, Sodepur Bazar,P.S.-Khardaha,
District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114, West Bengal.
14. Sri. ShekharChakraborty, New Colony,P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114,
West Bengal.
15. Sri. PintuMondal, Sodepur Station Road,P.O.-Panihati,
P.S.-Khardaha, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 114
West Bengal.
Vs=
Opposite Parties:- 1.Mr. RameswarPoddar(M.D.),
Ramel Industries Limited, 15, Krishnanagar Road.
Barasat, District-North 24 Parganas, Pin-700 126,
West Bengal.
2. Smt. ShikhaDebnath, Ramel Industries Limited
Top Senior Member, C/o BiplabDebnath,
Vill-Alipur West (Rabindra Nagar), Kalabagan,
P.O. & P.S.-Nimta, District-North 24 Parganas,
Pin-700 049, West Bengal.
Contd/-2
C.C. No. 381/2016
:: 2 ::
P R E S E N T :- Sri. Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay………..…..President.
:- Smt. SilpiMajumder ………………………Member.
Final Order
The complainants lodged this case under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the O.Ps and prayed for directing upon the O.Ps jointly and severally to pay Rs. 1,24,792/- including 12% interest p.a from the redemption date till realization and also to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compenstgion for mental agony and harassment and also a litigation cost amounting to Rs. 10,000/-.
The brief facts of the case of the complainants is that they purchased certificates from O.Ps namely Ramel Industries Ltd. The particulars of receipt have been given in a schedule:-
Sl. No. | Name | Receipt No. | Certificate No | Applicant date of Issue | Applicant Amount | Payment period | Maturity date | Maturity amount | Payment after date |
1. | Gopal Dey Complt-1 | M/HED/5190 | SDPM 13598200 | 20/05/12 | 33,660/- | 12 | 20/05/13 | 33,660/- | 27/08/13 |
2 | SunilSen Cmplt-2 | M/HED 5196 | SDPM 3598205 | 28/05/12 | 33,660/- | 12 | 28/05/13 | 33,660/- | 27/08/13 |
3 | Krishna Pada Halder/C-3 | M/HED 5197 | SDPM 13598888 | 28/05/12 | 3,672/- | 12 | 28/05/13 | 3,672/- | 27/08/13 |
4. | Lipan Sarkar /C-4 | M/HED 5200 | SDPM 3000765 | 15/06/12 | 3,060/- | 12 | 15/06/13 | 3,060/- | 27/08/13 |
5. | Swapan Kr. Ghosh/C-5 | M/HED 3600762 | SDPM 13600762 | 15/06/12 | 3,060/- | 12 | 15/06/13 | 3,060/- | 27/08/13 |
6. | Samar Ghosh /C-6 | M/HED 15202 | SDPM 3600763 | 15/06/12 | 4,080/- | 12 | 15/06/13 | 4,080/- | 27/08/13 |
7. | Ballu Das/C-7 | M/HED 5192 | SDPM 13598207 | 28/05/12 | 3,960/- | 12 | 28/05/13 | 3,960/- | 27/08/13 |
8. | Rabi Mondal/C-8 | M/HED 5194 | SDPM 13598200 | 28/05/12 | 6,120/- | 12 | 28/05/13 | 6,120/- | 27/08/13 |
9. | Mongala Roy/C-9 | M/HED 5213 | SDPM 3608764 | 15/06/12 | 5,508/- | 12 | 15/06/13 | 5,508/- | 27/08/13 |
10. | Debashis Das/C-10 | M/HED 5187 | SDPM 13597717 | 23/05/12 | 3,960/- | 12 | 23/05/13 | 3,960/- | 27/08/13 |
11. | Bimal Saha/C-11 | S.D.P 12 | SDPM 3597719 | 23/05/12 | 3,600/- | 12 | 23/05/13 | 3,600/- | 22/06/13 |
12. | T. K. Prasad/C-12 | S.D.P 11 | SDPM 3597716 | 23/05/12 | 3,600/- | 12 | 23/05/13 | 3,600/- | 22/06/13 |
13. | Laxman Ghatak/C-13 | S.D.P 10 | SDPM 3597714 | 23/05/12 | 3,600/- | 12 | 23/05/13 | 3,600/- | 22/06/13 |
14. | Shekhar Chakraborty | S.D.P 7 | SDPM 13596387 | 16/04/12 | 6,600/- | 12 | 16/05/13 | 6,600/- | 15/06/13 |
15. | Pinto Mondal/C-15 | M/HED/5190 | SDPM 13598214 | 23/05/12 | 6,732/- | 12 | 28/05/13 | 6,732/- | 27/08/13 |
| | | Amount | Rs. | 1,24,792/- | All Total Value Rs | | 1,24,792/- | |
The complainants have alleged that in issuance of the said receipts they are entitled to get Rs. 1,24,792/- after maturity of the certificates for a term of 12 months. The photo copies of the said receipts have been filed as Annexure ‘A’. Although after maturity on the dates as mentioned in the schedule the O.Ps did not pay any single farthing the complainants. The complainants
Contd/3
C.C. No. 381/2016
:: 3 ::
visited the office of the O.Ps and claimed the amount as mentioned herein but in vain. The complainant No.1 namely Gopal Dey made representation to the O.Ps on 29.05.2015 for satisfying the claim of the complainants within a period of 15 days. But the O.Ps did not gave any reply. The photo copy of the letter has been annexed as Annexure ‘B’. As such the complainants have compelled to file the instant complaint for proper remedy and redressal. According to the complainants, there is deficiency of service and mis-conduct on the part of the O.Ps. The O.Ps made unfair trade practice. The complainants in such way have been suffered a lot mentally and physically and as such the O.Ps are liable for the sufferings of the complainants. Hence this case filed on 16.06.2016.
Though the notices duly served upon the O.Ps but they did not turn up to contest the instant case.
The Complainants have adduced evidence on affidavit and they have also filed BNA. The record reveals that inspite of receipt of notices the OPs did not turn up to contest the complaint either orally or by filing written version within the statutory period or thereafter. Hence the Ld. Forum was pleased to fix the complaint exparte against the OPs. On the date of argument none was present on behalf of the OPs, hence we took up the complaint for hearing exparte against the OPs.
Upon careful perusal of the complaint along with documents as filed it is seen by us admittedly the complaint is filed by 15 Complainants/Consumer, but in the affidavit Sri. Gopal Dey has mentioned that he is authorized by the Complainant to proceed with this complaint. Therefore this complaint is filed in the representative capacity as out of 15 Complainants one Complainant is authorized to proceed, but in this respect no separate petition is filed u/S 12 (1) ( c ) of the Consumer protection Act. Before admission hearing it was the duty of the Complainants to proceed with the said application. After getting written permission from the Ld. Forum by an order, then only the petition of complaint can be taken for admission hearing. But in the instant complaint no such application is filed. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble NCDRC in the Ambrish Shukla’s case, such petition is mandatory.
Further it is noticed by us that though this complaint is filed by 15 Complainants, but their interest are not similar in nature as the Complainants deposited money with the OPs on different dates, maturity dates are also different and the deposited amount are also not same. Therefore as the maturity dates are different, the date of cause of action are also different. Admittedly in all respect the cause of action are continuing as the Complainants did not get the maturity amount till date of filing of the complaint. As per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 one or more consumers can file a single complaint having similar interest. So on this score this complaint cannot be allowed as it is not filed in a proper manner and in accordance with law.
Hence it is ordered that the complaint is dismissed exparte without any cost. However the Complainants are at liberty to file complaint in a proper manner in accordance with law before the appropriate Forum for redressal of their grievance, if not barred otherwise.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.
Member President
Dictated & Corrected by me.
