DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No : 246/2014
Date of Institution : 07.11.2014
Date of Decision : 28.08.2015
Sandeep Kaur minor d/o Avtar Singh, r/o Ward No. 8, Patti Gahu, Longowal, District Sangrur, through her father guardian next friend Avtar Singh.
…Complainant
Versus
1. Pakho Enterprises, Bhinder Dental Clinic, Bus Stand, Pakho Kalan, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala, through its authorized signatory.
2. Mewa Singh s/o Gurcharan Singh r/o Dhillon Patti, Pakho Kalan, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala.
3. Sukhpal Singh s/o Jeet Singh, r/o Bassi Patti, Pakho Kalan, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala.
4. Virbal Singh s/o Sukhdev Singh, r/o Mansa Road, Pakho Kalan, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala.
5. Bhupinder Singh c/o Maternal Grandfather Gurdev Singh Bharra (Kanoonia De) Sagar Patti, Pakho Kalan, District Barnala.
6. Sunil Kumar s/o Balbir Singh the alleged Managing Partner of Pakho Enterprises, Bhinder Dental Clinic, Bus Stand, Pakho Kalan, Tehsil Tapa, District Barnala, now residing at Shiv Vatika Colony, Kothi No. 6, Barnala Tehsil and District Barnala. (Deleted vide order dated 13.7.2015).
…Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Present: Sh. Ramandeep Rajput counsel for the complainant
Opposite parties No. 1 to 5 exparte
Opposite party No. 6 deleted
Quorum.-
1. Shri S.K. Goel : President.
2. Sh. Karnail Singh : Member
3. Ms. Vandna Sidhu : Member
ORDER
(SHRI S.K. GOEL PRESIDENT):
Sandeep Kaur through her father (hereinafter referred as complainant) has filed the present complaint against Pakho Enterprises and others (hereinafter referred as opposite parties) under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred as Act).
2. The facts emerging from the present complaint are that the opposite parties floated a scheme under the heading “Sale Promotion Scheme”. The complainant got the Membership of the said scheme vide ID No. 0314 through her father. A brochure/booklet was supplied by the opposite parties wherein it was mentioned that the scheme was to be completed in 10 monthly installments each of Rs. 1,000/- and on every month, a draw will be opened and the winner person will be given the prize as mentioned in the brochure. It has also been mentioned that the up and down ID of the winner will also be given the prize as mentioned in the brochure. It is further mentioned in the second last page of the brochure that at the end of the scheme the remaining members will be given Rs. 11,000/- each in cash. On the last page of the brochure it is written that the scheme will be completed in 10 installments. It is also mentioned that if any person will win the prize then further installments need not be given by such winner person. It is further averred that the complainant through her father has deposited all the 10 installments each of Rs. 1,000/- with the office of the opposite parties at Pakho Enterprises, Bhinder Dental Clinic, Bus Stand, Pakho Kalan for which 10 receipts were issued in the name of the complainant. It is further averred that the complainant has not been the winner of any of the ten draws as such as per the terms of the brochure complainant is entitled to an amount of Rs. 11,000/- but the opposite parties have failed to disburse the same despite many requests made by the complainant. Therefore, there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-
1) To pay Rs. 11,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of deposit.
2) To pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses.
3. Upon notice, the opposite parties No. 3 and 5 filed a written version taking legal objections interalia on the ground of maintainability, misuse of process of law, frivolous complaint, territorial jurisdiction, bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties and the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands. On merits, the opposite parties have denied the deposit by the complainant or her father with them. However, they admitted about floating of this scheme but they denied that any document by any side signed or executed by them in favour of the complainant. Moreover the complainant never visited the opposite party nor any alleged brochure was supplied to the complainant by the opposite parties. The opposite parties No. 3 and 5 have denied the other pleas of the complainant and finally prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. The opposite party No. 4 has also filed the written version on the lines of the written version filed by the opposite parties No. 3 and 5.
5. The opposite party No. 2 also filed the written version on the lines of the written version filed by the opposite parties No. 3 and 5 and finally prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
6. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered affidavit of Avtar Singh Ex.C-1, brochure Ex.C-2, receipts Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-12 and closed the evidence.
7. It is also worth mentioning here that during the proceedings of this case the opposite parties failed to produce any evidence and ultimately the evidence of the opposite parties No. 2 to 5 was closed by order on 18.8.2015. Moreover they were proceeded again exparte as opposite parties No. 1 to 5 failed to appear in the Forum to produce their evidence. Further, the learned counsel for the complainant has made a statement to delete the name of the opposite party No. 6 from the array of the opposite parties and accordingly the name of the opposite party No. 6 is already deleted from the array of the opposite parties vide order dated 13.7.2015.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through all the record on the file carefully.
9. It is proved on the file that, opposite parties floated a sale promotion scheme and complainant through her father had got the membership of the said scheme vide Membership ID No. 0314. It is also proved on the file that a booklet was supplied by the opposite parties. It is also proved on the file that the above mentioned scheme was to be completed in 10 monthly installments each of Rs. 1,000/- and on every month a draw will be opened and winner person will be given the prize as mentioned in the booklet/brochure. It is also proved on the file that at the ends of the scheme the remaining members will be given Rs. 11,000/- each in cash.
10. Complainant in support of her complaint has tendered into evidence affidavit of her father Avtar Singh Ex.C-1, which proves the above mentioned facts. Further, complainant has tendered into evidence original brochure Ex.C-2 which proves that opposite parties floated the sale promotion scheme in which the terms and conditions of this scheme are mentioned. In this brochure it is also mentioned that Rs. 11,000/- will be given to the remaining members in cash. The complainant to support her case also tendered in evidence 10 original receipts in her name Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-12 which clearly proves that complainant deposited all the 10 installments with the opposite parties. On all these receipts Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-12 the name of the complainant and her Membership ID number 0314 is clearly mentioned which proves that these all receipts relates to the complainant.
11. In our opinion the complainant has brought cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence on the file in support of her complaint whereas the opposite parties failed to produce any documentary or oral evidence to rebut the evidence of the complainant. Therefore, the evidence led by the complainant is un-rebutted and un-contested, so the presumption of truth can be attached to the un-rebutted evidence of the complainant. Moreover all the documents submitted by the complainant in her evidence were duly issued by the opposite parties.
12. As a result of the above discussion, this Forum is of the considered opinion that the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 are deficient in providing service to the complainant, so the complaint filed by the complainant is accepted. Accordingly, opposite parties No. 1 to 5 are directed to pay the amount of Rs. 11,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the due date of this amount till realization. The opposite parties No. 1 to 5 have caused mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant, therefore, the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 are also directed to pay Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation. Further, the opposite parties No. 1 to 5 are also directed to pay Rs. 1,100/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. The opposite parties No. 1 to 5 jointly and severally liable to comply with this order. This order shall be complied with within 45 days from the date of the receipt of this order. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. The file be consigned to the records.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN FORUM:
28th Day of August 2015
(S.K. Goel)
President
(Karnail Singh)
Member
(Vandna Sidhu)
Member
