Bihar

Patna

CC/351/2013

Sri Saket Prakash, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Prop. M/s Raj Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Patna, - Opp.Party(s)

31 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
PATNA, BIHAR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/351/2013
( Date of Filing : 11 Jul 2013 )
 
1. Sri Saket Prakash,
S/o- Sri Naresh Pd. Singh, R/o- Naipali Nagar, PS- Rajiv nagar, Distt- patna,
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Prop. M/s Raj Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Patna,
307, 3rd Floor, Dumraon Place Dak Bunglow Chauraha patna-1
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 31 May 2016
Final Order / Judgement

Present         (1)     Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                         President

                    (2)     Smt. Karishma Mandal,

                              Member

Date of Order : 31.05.2016

                    Smt. Karishma Mandal

  1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
  1. To direct the opposite party to refund Rs. 3,00,000/- along with interest @ 14% quarterly from the date of payment till realization.
  2. To direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- ( Rs. Three Lakh only ) as compensation.
  3. To direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 15,000/- ( Rs. Fifteen Thousand only ) as litigation costs.
  1. The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-

The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a machine for making plastic board and cover from opposite party after payment of Rs. 3,00,000/- in cash vide annexure – 1.

The opposite party had assured that he would provide training and other items such as raw material, marketing etc. to the complainant for 11 months as per agreement which is the part of annexure – 1. Relying on the aforesaid agreement the complainant purchased the aforesaid machine on the condition mentioned in the agreement dated 13.05.2013 referred above.

It is further case of the complainant that after purchasing the aforesaid machine, the complainant found that machine was defective and as such he complaint to the opposite party to remove the defect as it was under the guarantee period but the opposite party did not take steps and did not work as per agreement.

It is also the case of the complainant that he is unemployed person and for the purpose of running the machine he has made agreement with the electricity board for the allotment of three face connection and the electricity board has allotted three face connection after taking advance money. The complainant’s father has also entered an agreement with Ranjani Ranjan for the purpose of rent agreement @ Rs. 2,000/- per month for the period of 11 months vide annexure – 2.

It has been further asserted by the complainant that due to aforesaid conduct of the aforesaid party the complainant who is unemployed person has been put to great loss and mental harassment.

From judicial record it appears that on 02.09.2013 the opposite party was present in the Forum and stated that he will compromise the matter. He has also filed an application in this Forum on 04.12.2013 stating therein that talk of compromise is going on for which he has requested for time. This application of opposite party is in judicial record. This type of petition has also been filed on 02.09.2013 which is also in the record but the opposite party has never turned up to file written statement and he deliberately avoided this Forum, this is a serious matter.

From the petition dated 25.04.2014 filed by the complainant it appears that the opposite party had given two cheques of ICICI Bank for the amount of Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- respectively but the aforesaid cheques were returned by bank on 12.09.2013 for insufficient fund.

Thereafter this case was heard in absence of opposite party as he has deliberately avoided this Forum.

On behalf of the complainant the photocopy of the money receipt, agreement, receipt of Bihar State Electricity Board and agreement with one Ranjani Ranjan Singh has been filed which are in the record from Page 10 to 19 of the complaint petition.

The aforesaid documents clearly shows that the opposite party after selling aforesaid machine to complainant vide annexure – 1 did not removed the defect during guarantee period and also did not act as per agreement entered with the complainant as stated above.

The aforesaid fact asserted by the complainant in the complaint petition clearly proves that there is deficiency on the part of opposite party. Who despite having full knowledge has not filed written statement after taking time in this Forum. Hence we are bound to rely on the facts asserted by the complainant in affidavit.

Hence we direct the opposite party to return Rs. 3,00,000/- to the complainant which he has taken vide annexure – 1 within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite party will have to pay an interest @ 12% on the aforesaid amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- till its final payment is made.

Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two months.

Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent indicated above.

                             Member                                                                              President

 

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.