Andhra Pradesh

Chittoor-II at triputi

CC/23/2017

U.Gopinath Reddy, S/o U.Eswar Reddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Gateway Clothing Pvt Ltd., Rep. by its authorized signatory - Opp.Party(s)

A.Sudarsana Babu

08 Dec 2017

ORDER

Filing Date: 10.03.2017

Order Date:08.12.2017

 

 

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II,

CHITTOOR AT TIRUPATI

 

 

      PRESENT: Sri.M.Ramakrishnaiah, President ,

        Smt. T.Anitha, Member

 

 

 

FRIDAY THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN

 

 

 

C.C.No.23/2017

 

 

Between

 

 

U.Gopinath Reddy,

S/o. U.Eswar Reddy,

Hindu, aged about 25 years,

D.No.1-30, Thanapalle Village,

Tirupati Rural Mandal,

Chittoor District.

 

Having shop at:

 

Denim Culture,

D.No.120E, Prakasam Road,

Tirupati,

Chittoor District.                                                                              … Complainant.

 

And

 

 

M/s. Gateway Clothing Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its authorized signatory,

Having its office at:

D.No.28/B, DLF Industrial Area,

Phase-I,

Faridabad – 121 003,

Haryana State.                                                                                  …  Opposite party.

 

 

 

 

            This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 30.11.17 and upon perusing the complaint and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing Sri.A.Sudarsana Babu, counsel for complainant, and opposite party remained ex-parte, and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum makes the following:-

ORDER

DELIVERED BY SRI. M.RAMAKRISHNAIAH, PRESIDENT

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH

           

            This complaint is filed under Section –12 of C.P.Act 1986, by the complainant against the opposite party for the following reliefs 1) to direct the opposite party to refund the security deposit amount of Rs.10,00,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of payment i.e. July 2014 till realization, 2) to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- with interest at 13% p.a. towards the damages and mental agony suffered by the complainant, and 3) to direct the opposite party to pay the costs of the complaint, and to pass such other or further reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper in the  circumstances of the case.

2. The brief averments of the complaint are:-  That the complainant being a B.Tech graduate to eek-out his livelihood availed loan from HDFC bank and started self-employment and running cloth shop under the name and style of “Denim Culture”. That the complainant used to get the stock from opposite party on condition of depositing Rs.10,00,000/- as security, for which he obtained loan from HDFC bank and used to run his cloth shop. As the owner of the shop in which the complainant doing his business started renovation of the shop and could not complete the renovation work and handover the shop to the complainant within time, hence the complainant is forced to close the shop. The complainant intimated the same to the opposite party in the month of October 2015 and as per the advice of the opposite party he started returning the stock to opposite party, but the opposite party did not receive the stock. The VRL logistics through which the complainant returned the stock to opposite party issued auction notices on 25.06.2016 and 08.07.2016 stating that the opposite party did not claim the stock. Then the complainant made number of phone calls, sent e-mail dt:18.06.2015 and also got issued legal notice dt:15.12.2016 to the opposite party, claiming refund of the security deposit and requesting the opposite party to take back the stock, but the opposite party having received the said notice, did not refund the security deposit of Rs.10,00,000/-. Thus the opposite party has committed deficiency in service on their part and caused much mental agony to the complainant. Hence the complaint.

3.  The opposite party remained ex-parte.

4.  The complainant filed his evidence affidavit as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A6.

5.  Now the points for consideration are:-

(i).  Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

(ii).  Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for?

(iii).  To what relief?

6. Point No.(i):- In order to answer this point, we have to state that the complainant’s case in nutshell is, that he used to get the stock from the opposite party and running his cloth business, for the purpose of which he made a security deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- by obtaining the loan from HDFC bank. That due to the owner of the shop commenced renovation work and could not complete the renovation work and handover the shop within time to the complainant, the complainant closed his business and intimated the same to the opposite party and started returning the stock to the opposite party, but the opposite party failed to receive the stock back, as such the VRL logistics through which the complainant sent the stock to opposite party, issued two auction notices dt:25.06.2016 and 08.07.2016 stating that the opposite party did not claim the stock, therefore they are going to conduct auction over the stock. Immediately, the complainant contacted the opposite party, but they did not lift the phone and though the complainant sent e-mail to the opposite party on 18.06.2015 and also got issued legal notice on 15.12.2016, the opposite party did not respond to the phone calls and did not give reply to the e-mail and also did not refund the security deposit.

7.  In this regard, we have to state that the complainant in the complaint mentioned the address of the opposite party as follows – D.No.28/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad – 121  003, Haryana State. As per the notice sent by the complainant under Ex.A4 and acknowledgement under Ex.A5 the address of the opposite party is mentioned as D.No.68/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad-121003, Haryana State. The complainant having stated the opposite party address in the complaint as D.No.28/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad – 121  003, Haryana State, why he has changed the address of the opposite party in his notice and acknowledgement under Exs.A4 and A5 as  D.No.68/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad-121003, Haryana State?. As per Ex.A3 auction notices, the address of opposite party is also mentioned as D.No.68/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad-121003, Haryana State. So, due to change of the door number, notice may not have served on the opposite party. It seems that the complainant intentionally changed the address of the opposite party as mentioned in the complaint into 68/B instead of 28/B DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad-121003.

8.  Apart from it, the complainant either in the complaint or in his evidence affidavit did not mention when he started returning the stock to the opposite party, nature of the stock returned, value of the stock returned etc. particulars, and also failed to mention the consignment numbers through which he sent the stock. There is no evidence that the complainant has intimated the opposite party about the closure of his business. Similarly, there is no evidence that the opposite party has advised the complainant to return the stock. Whenever the stock is sent back to the opposite party through VRL Logistics, necessarily there shall be consignment numbers and dates, and also particulars of the stocks that were sent, will be furnished to the complainant, as evidence that he has sent the stock through the particular consignment, but no such material is placed before the Forum. Thus, it is evident that there is no evidence to show that the complainant has sent any such stock to the opposite party as alleged by the complainant. There shall be some proof to show that he has sent the stock to the opposite party on particular date with particular consignment numbers. Similarly, there is no evidence that the opposite party agreed to receive the stock back. As per the notice under Ex.A4, at para.3 it is mentioned that “At this juncture, he intimated the same to you and at your advice, he started sending back the dead stock at the first phase and the remaining stock in phased manner”. When the stock under first phase was sent, under what consignment number. Similarly when the remaining stock was sent in phased manner and how many times the complainant sent the stock and its quantity for each time under each consignment along with the details of consignment numbers were also not furnished. Likewise, the complainant also failed to mention when the complainant got the stock from the opposite party, nature of stock he received and worth of the stock he got, consignment numbers through which the complainant received the stock etc. details either in the complaint or in his evidence affidavit. No affidavit is filed from the owner of the shop to establish that the owner started renovation of the shop. It is also not mentioned that when the complainant started returning the stock, how many times he returned the stock with consignment numbers in particular etc. Similarly, there is no evidence that the opposite party has given consent for taking back the stock. If any such consent is given, details of such consent with dates, correspondence numbers has to be furnished, but complainant failed to do so. In the absence of any details as mentioned above, such as details of stock sent, dates on which the alleged stocks were sent and also specific consignment numbers, no fault can be find with the opposite party. Security deposit is meant for taking stocks from the opposite party and for running the business by the complainant. The complainant also failed to furnish any document showing that there was an agreement between the complainant and opposite party for sending the stocks by the opposite party and also to receive back the stocks when such circumstances warranted.

9.  Ex.A3 auction notices discloses that those auction notices were sent on 28.10.2015, 25.06.2016 and 08.07.2016, and they further discloses that the reference No.1005930396 dt:28.10.2015 for value of Rs.1,96,526/-, wgt:185, another auction notice dt:08.07.2016 with reference No.1005930905 dt:21.11.2015 for a value of Rs.33,958/-, wgt:23, in both the letters some columns were left blank and it is further informed to the complainant that the consignment pertaining to the above ‘way-bill’ has not been claimed by your consignee within the stipulated period inspite of repeated reminders. Hence, our (left blank) branch has forwarded the said consignment to our un-claimed property section VARUR HUBBALLI – 581 207 and the consignment is lying with us at your risk, attracting storage charges on day to day basis. When the complaint itself shows that the particulars of the opposite party as D.No.28/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad – 121  003, Haryana State, how the auction notice under Ex.A3 and acknowledgements under Exs.A4 and A5 were given address of the opposite party as D.No.68/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad – 121  003, Haryana State, how the complainant could expect that the goods / stock, if any sent were reached to the opposite party. In view of the change of address of the opposite party, we can say that the complainant failed to establish that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Ex.A6 bank statement issued by HDFC bank, some amounts were withdrawn by Gateway Clothing Pvt. Ltd. i.e. opposite party in number of occasions starting from August 2014 to November 2015. When the complainant stopped his business in the month of October 2015, why those amounts were paid to the opposite party even in the month of November 2015. As per Ex.A1 G-mail, the opposite party confirmed that they have received Rs.10,00,000/- as security deposit from Denim Culture. It further discloses that it was addressed to Denim Culture, at the bottom it was from Denim Culture, that suspicion was not clarified by the complainant. Ex.A2 G-mail under the name of Adventure Tirupati to Sunny Singh, it was not specifically addressed either to opposite party or to VRL logistics, it is mentioned as Dear All, we had call you lot of times, but we did not get any reply from your side. We had packed all the stock. We are sending it. So, please refund our deposit as soon as possible and also send Form-16 for the year 2014-2015. It discloses that it was not addressed to any specific person or company or firm. It further discloses that the complainant is doing business from 2014 onwards, asking Form-16 for the year 2014-2015 shows that it is for the purpose of IT returns. In the cover sent to the opposite party M/s. Gateway Clothing Pvt. Ltd. represented by its authorized signatory to their office at D.No. D.No.28/B, DLF Industrial Area, Phase-I, Faridabad – 121003, Haryana State. On this cover sent to opposite party door number is mentioned as 28/B, whereas in the postal acknowledgement card under Ex.A5, the door number of the opposite party was mentioned as 68/B, why this discrepancy was took place in the documents of the complainant, giving one address in the complaint, sending notices to another address and acknowledgement with different address i.e. different door numbers itself shows that the complainant intentionally changed the door number of the opposite party and sent the notice without mentioning the details of the stock sent, as discussed supra. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the complainant failed to establish that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly, this point is answered.

10. Point No.(ii):- In view of our discussion on point No.1, and since the complainant failed to clarify the discrepancies that were crept in Exs.A1 to A5, and that in the absence of furnishing their details such as there is consent from the opposite party to receive the stock back and the complainant sent the stock to the opposite party, and failure in mentioning the quantity of stock, worth of stock, nature of stock with specific consignment numbers or consignment receipts from the VRL logistics evidencing that the complainant has sent the particular stocks to the opposite party. Unless the complainant established that he has sent the stock to opposite party under a particular consignment number / numbers with description of quantity of stock, worth of stock and nature of stock and whether the alleged stock sent is equivalent to the worth / cost of the stock received etc. with detailed information, it cannot be said that the complainant is entitled to this relief.  We are unable to convince with the case of the complainant and hold that the complainant failed to establish that he is entitled for the reliefs sought for. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the complainant is not entitled for the reliefs sought for. Accordingly this point is answered.

11.  Point No.(iii):-  In view of our discussion on points 1 and 2 and since the complainant failed to establish that there is consent from the opposite party to receive the stock, and also failed to establish that he has sent any stocks to the opposite party under specific consignment with details of quantity of stock, worth of stock, nature of stock etc. as discussed supra, we are of the opinion that the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

In the result, complaint is dismissed. No costs.                   

Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Forum this the 8^th day of December, 2017.

 

       Sd/-                                                                                                                      Sd/-                             

Lady Member                                                                                                      President

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

 

 

 

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Complainant/s.

 

PW-1: U. Gopinatha Reddy (Chief Affidavit filed).

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Opposite PartY/S.

 

-NIL-

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT/s

 

Exhibits (Ex.A)	Description of Documents
	Mail copy Dt: 18.06.2015 sent by opposite party to complainant. (Photo Copy).
	Mail copy Dt: 02.02.2016 sent by complainant. (Photo copy).
	Auction Notices 2 in original. Dt: 25.06.2016, 08.07.2016.
	Office copy of the legal notice Dt: 15.12.2016 caused by complainant along with postal receipt.
	Acknowledgement Card.
	Photo copy of Statement of Account issued by HDFC Bank for the period from 01.06.2014 to 01.01.2016. Generation Date: 12.07.2016.

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY/s

 

-NIL-

      

 

                                                                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                                                                      President

 

      // TRUE COPY //

// BY ORDER //

 

Head Clerk/Sheristadar,

          Dist. Consumer Forum-II, Tirupati.

           

    

   Copies to:- 1.  The complainant.

                        2.  The opposite party.