Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/164/2024

Sai Chemicals Prop. Kishore Kumar Sahu, - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S- BAJRANGBALI RE-ROLLERS (PVT) LTD. PROP. AMIT AGARWAL - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. R.Gupta & Assocites

04 Nov 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sambalpur
Near, SBI Main Branch, Sambalpur
Uploaded by Office Assistance
 
Complaint Case No. CC/164/2024
( Date of Filing : 14 May 2024 )
 
1. Sai Chemicals Prop. Kishore Kumar Sahu,
S/O- Purna Chandra Sahu At- Rengalpali, Po- Mundhenpali Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha Pin- 768112
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S- BAJRANGBALI RE-ROLLERS (PVT) LTD. PROP. AMIT AGARWAL
Plot No-A/3, Industrial Estate, Kalunga Dist- Sundergarh, Odisha, Pin- 770031
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sri. R.Gupta & Assocites, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 04 Nov 2024
Final Order / Judgement

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.- 164/2024

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. SadanandaTripathy, Member

 

Sai Chemicals

Prop. Kishore Kumar Sahu, Aged About 47 Years

S/O- Purna Chandra Sahu

At- Rengalpali, Po- Mundhenpali

Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha Pin- 768112        

E Mail Id -

Type of Enterprise- Micro, Mob- 9438047110               .....Complainant

-Vrs. –

 

M/S- BAJRANGBALI RE-ROLLERS (PVT) LTD.

PROP. AMIT AGARWAL

Plot No-A/3, Industrial Estate, Kalunga

Dist- Sundergarh, Odisha, Pin- 770031

Email- Brplamit@Gmail.Com

GSTIN- 21AACCB6678AIZ3

Mob- 9437044295                                                                            ......Opp.Party

 

Counsels:-

  1. For the Complainant         :- Sri. R. Gupta & Associates
  2. For the O.Ps.                       :- Ex-parte

 

Date of Filing:14.05.2024,  Date of Hearing :24.09.2024  Date of Judgement : 04.11.2024

 

Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.

  1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant started a MSME for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment and has setup a plant for manufacturing Sodium Silicate which required to the Re-rollers companies as raw material. The OP is a Private Limited Company who is manufacturing Iron rods, angles etc. The OP was in search of a MSME who will supply sodium Silicate to the Company for their production requirements. In the meantime the OP came in contact with the Complainant’s firm and after several negotiations relating to rate and quality with Complainant was regularly purchasing chemicals from the Complainant. In the month of September the OP purchased 2.510 MT of chemical from the Complainant and after being satisfied in the month of November the company has again placed a work order dtd. 26.11.2022 for an amount of 2.500 MT of Sodium Silicate. The Complainant with a hope of the said orders from the OP purchased the required raw materials for production of the said ordered chemical on dtd. 15.09.2022 by paying Rs. 8,15,793/- including GST of Rs. 1,24,443/- from one Rubber Processor Pvt Ltd of Chhattisgarh and started manufacturing the chemical. After receiving the work order the Complainant started supply of material to the OP. As per the first work order dtd. 26.112022, the Complainant on dtd. 27.11.2022 despatched the chemical of weight 2.650 kg of Rs. 43,719/- including GST.  On dtd. 20th Dec, 2022 after 23 days suddenly sent a mail to the Complainant and as per their mail “we have received your supplied materials Sodium Silicate vide invoice no-100 dtd. 27.11.2022 qty- 2.470 MT and after verification and testing, it is found that the material is not our specification, the same is intimated to you over phone, look at the matter or otherwise we raise a debit note for the same”. The Complainant after receiving the mail several time called the OP for return of the said material and to raise a debit note but the Op neither received the call nor sent the debit note and returned the said material. The Complainant requested the OP for returning the materials and promised that the transportation cost will be borne by him but the OP did not listen to the Complainant. The OP not paid the bill amount and not raised the debit note which amounts to deficiency in service.
  2. The OP is set-exparte.
  3. From the records and evidences, it is observed that the Complainant has not purchased nor availed service from the OP on consideration paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised. So, he is not a consumer of the OP as per C P Act, 2019. Hence, the case is dismissed on merit.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 4th day of Nov, 2024.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sadananda Tripathy]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.