No. 27/19.09.2011.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

Both sides are present through their Ld. Advocates.  This complaint has been filed by the Complainant, Government of Tripura by alleging that for the purpose of holding Panchyat Election in the state of Tripura, Government of Tripura had placed orders for supplying 280 reams of pink colour papers with the specification as mentioned in the letter dated 01.07.2009 for printing of ballot papers with the O.Ps namely M/s. Pannalall Seal & Sons.  It has been alleged by the Complainant that the O.Ps failed to supply such papers with required specification.  As a result of which the papers supplied by the O.Ps could not be used for preparation of the ballot papers for the said election and the Complainant, Government of Tripura had to procure papers with required specification from other suppliers for holding the said Panchyat Election.  Because of such deficiency it has been alleged in the complaint petition that the Complainant, Government of Tripura had to suffer and/or incurr a loss of Rs.20,19,654/- and has therefore invoked the jurisdiction of the State Commission for redressal of such loss.  The break-up of the said loss as allegedly suffered by the Complainant, Government of Tripura has been given in paragraph 19 of the above complaint.  In paragraph 16 of the said complaint it has been specifically stated by the Complainant, Government of Tripura, that the supplied materials of 280 reams of papers did not conform to the specification as made in the aforesaid leter dated 01.07.2009 issued by the Government of Tripura by placing order with the O.P.   The papers that were supplied could not, therefore, be used in the said Panchyat Election for which the local banker of the Government of Tripura was instructed not to honour the cheque of Rs.3,81,500/- issued in favour of O.P.  It is also not the case of the Complainant that the O.P. had been paid with the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,81,500/- at any time after 280 reams of papers were supplied to the Complainant.  But most surprisingly the said break-up of alleged loss of Rs.20,19,754/- suffered by the Complainant contained the cost of papers at Rs.3,81,500/-.  We are, therefore, of the view that this amount of Rs.3,81,500/- being the price of the papers supplied to the Complainant has been included in the alleged loss of Rs.20,19,264/- only for the purpose of inflating the claim so as to invite the jurisdiction of the State Commission.  On the pleadings of the parties and without questioning the break-up of the loss as allegedly suffered by the Complainant it is evident that the same cannot in any event be more than Rs.20,00,000/- exclusive of the price of the papers. 

The State Commission has accordingly no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain this claim.  We, therefore, permit the Complainant, Government of Tripura, to withdraw the claim petition and to present the same before the appropriate forum for its adjudication.  If the said complaint is refiled by the Complainant upon withdrawal within one month from this date then the concerned District Forum will proceed to decide the same on the merits of the complaint without going into the question of limitation in filing the complaint.  The Complainant will withdraw the original complaint without seeking refund of the application fees and be at liberty to refile the same at the appropriate Forum without payment of any further fees for presenting the same.