West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/9/2017

SK Ibrahim, S/o Lt Sk Jan Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

Prop, Mumtaj Ali, Mohor Automoble - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjit Kr Acharya

12 Apr 2018

ORDER

Shri Biswa Nath Konar,  President.

            The case of the complainant Sk. Ibrahim, in brief, is that he intended to purchase a tractor of Massey Ferguson Tractor, M.F. 7L50DI exclusively for the purpose of agriculture and he had been to the O.P and the O.P gave a quotation of Rs. 695000/- against the purchase price of said tractor. He paid Rs. 251000/- as down payment, Rs. 90000/- by cash and Rs. 161000/- by giving an old Escort Tractor being No. WB53/3910 to the O.P.

            It is the further case of the complainant that after receiving the said amount the O.P issued a delivery challan of the tractor being challan No. MA/2014/77 dated 23.03.2014 and also other papers, but the O.P did not deliver the tractor to the complainant as yet.

            It is the further case of the complainant that thereafter he had been to the office of the O.P on several times to get delivery of the vehicle but they did not pay any heed rather on 18.11.16 refused to deliver the same.

            It is the further case of the complainant that he served a legal notice upon the O.P Motor Co. but they have not taken any action. Hence, this case for directing the O.P Motor Co. to deliver the tractor in question and in alternative refund back Rs. 251000/- with interest and also for directing the O.P to pay Rs. 200000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

            Inspite of due service of notice the O.P Motor Co. has not appeared before this Forum and the case was heard ex parte against them.

DECISION WITH REASONS

During the trial the complainant Sk. Ibrahim has been examined as PW1 and filed some documents.

Heard arguments of Ld. Advocate/Agent of the complainant.

We find that the complainant in complaint and evidence claimed that he paid Rs. 251000/- as down payment for purchasing a Massey Ferguson Tractor from the O.P Mohor Automobile against total valuation of Rs. 695000/- and though the O.P had issued delivery challan but has not delivered the same as yet.

            We find that in the present case the complainant has not filed any cash memo/Invoice regarding payment of Rs. 251000/- to the O.P for purchasing the tractor in question.

            Original delivery challan dated 28.03.14 shows that said delivery challan issued by O.P Mohor Automobile in respect of tractor in question i.e. Massy Ferguson Tractor being chassis No. 954970 and engine No. 5325F32261.

            During hearing of argument Ld. Advocate/Agent of the complainant submitted that at the time of payment of said Rs. 251000/- by cash and by giving an old Escort tractor, the O.P Mohor Motor has not issued any paper barring delivery challan and owner’s service manual book2 in respect of tractor in question.

            We further find from the copy of the legal notice dated 17.12.16 issued by Shri Sanjit Kr. Acharya, Advocate on behalf of the complainant, registration slip and A/D card that said notice was duly service upon the O.P and there was allegation that inspite of receipt of Rs. 251000/- from the complainant the O.P did not deliver the tractor in question to the complainant though a delivery challan dated 28.03.14 was issued in favour of the complainant by them.

            Evidently the O.P Motor Co. neither sent any reply against the said legal notice nor took any steps in this regard.

            We further find that in the present case the complainant has made such allegation by filing evidence on affidavit and the O.P has not come forward to challenge/contradict his evidence.

In view of the ruling reported in IV2006CPJ 2013(NC) wherein a complaint case the complainant filed an affidavit by way of evidence but the O.Ps neither filed any evidence by way of affidavit nor cross examined the deponent. Hon’ble National Commission pleased to hold that allegation of the complainant remained uncontroverted and in absence of any counter affidavit case of the complainant stands prove.

            Considering overall matter into consideration and relying upon the ruling citied above we are constrained to hold that the complainant has been able to prove by his unchallenged testimony that he has paid Rs. 251000/- to the O.P for purchasing a tractor but they have not deliver the same, which amounts to deficiency in service and illegal trade practice on the part of the O.P.

            Accordingly the case is liable to be allowed in part. The complainant is entitled to get Rs. 251000/- as amount paid by him to the O.P as part price of the tractor in question with interest @ Rs. 6% P.A. from the date of payment till realization as alternative relief. He is also entitled to get Rs. 10000/- as compensation.

Proper fees have been paid.

 

Hence,

O R D E R E D

that C.F case No. 9/2017 be and the same is allowed on ex parte against O.P with a cost of Rs. 2000/-.

            The O.P Mohor Automoble is directed to pay Rs. 251000/- as amount paid by complainant to the O.P as part price of the tractor in question with interest @ Rs. 6% P.A. from the date of payment till realization as alternative relief to the complainant. The O.P is also directed to pay Rs. 10000/- as compensation for causing mental pain, agony and harassment to the complainant, within one month from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to execute the order as per law and procedure.

Copy of this order be supplied to the parties each free of cost.