Date of filing : 15.06.2021
Date of order : 27.02.2023
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VELLORE
PRESENT: THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A., B.L. PRESIDENT
THIRU. R. ASGHAR KHAN, B.Sc., B.L. MEMBER – I
SELVI. I. MARIAN RAJAM ANUGRAHA, M.B.A., MEMBER-II
MONDAY THE 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 16/2021
M.Dhamotharan,
S/o. Manickam,
No.130/7, Pillaiyar Kovil Street,
Thottapalayam,
Vellore -4. ...Complainant
-Vs-
1. The Proprietor,
S.K.S. Traders,
Vegetable Commission Merchant,
Whole Sale and Retail,
No. A-23, Nethaji Market,
Vellore -632 004.
2. The Branch Manager,
Corporation Bank Main Branch,
Anna Salai (Officers Line),
Vellore. ... Opposite parties
Counsel for complainant : M/s. S. Rajkumar,
Counsel for first opposite party : M/s. S. Suresh Kannan
Second opposite party : Set exparte on 20.4.2022
ORDER
THIRU. A. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, B.A., B.L. PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019. The complainant has prayed this Hon’ble Commission to direct the first opposite party to pay return the sum of Rs.3,16,500/- which he received from the second opposite party as his quotation amount to the complainant or to the second party with necessary bank loan interest till he repay the said amount, the first opposite party to pay the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with necessary interest from the date on 25.02.2021 as damages to the complainant for mental agony, torture and harassing the complainant in several ways for the past 2 months without discharging his lawful duty of supply vegetables to the complainant, the second opposite party not to insisting the complainant to pay the loan dues till the date of recovery made from the first opposite party and to pay the cost of this petition.
1. The Case of the complaint is briefly as follows:
The complainant was doing vegetable retail selling business at Nethaji market, Vellore-4 and he is maintaining book account with second opposite party. Also, the complainant is using the vegetables for his house usage also. Hence, this complaint. He is incurring financial struggling situating due Corona Disease Lock Down period and hence he approached the second opposite party for loan and the second opposite party also verified complainant’s account details and agreed to provide business loan to the extent of Rs.2,00,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant submitted the quotation details and agreed to provide business loan to the extent of Rs.2,00,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant submitted the quotation to the second opposite party for the sum of Rs.3,16,500/- received from the first opposite party. Hence, on 25.02.2021 the complainant had paid the exceed amount of Rs.1,16,500/- in his bank account and on the same day the second opposite party credited the loan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant’s S.B. Bank account No. 5201010155 08117 and on the very same day itself the second opposite party issued payment of Rs.3,16,500/- favouring to the first opposite party and the first opposite party duly in-cash the said sum Rs.3,16,500/-. After receipt of the above said sum of Rs.3,16,500/- from the second opposite party, the complainant approached the first party in several occasion and requested him to supply the vegetables but the first opposite party did not supply anything to the complainant by informing some false and vague reasons and sometime inform that the loan is not come. The first opposite party did not supply even single vegetables till this date with ulterior motives and what reason is behind which is best known to the first opposite party. The second opposite party insisting the complainant to pay the loan dues and hence on 15.03.20221 the complainant met the second opposite party directly and given a letter to him by mentioning the non-supplying the vegetables of the first opposite party and requested him to take suitable action against the first opposite party for reimbursement of Rs.3,16,500/- from the first opposite and after knowing the above said letter, the first opposite party closed his bank account with the second opposite party. Due to non-supplying of vegetables by the first opposite party, the complainant incurred heavy financial loss in his business and the first opposite party harassed the complainant in several ways who the lawful consumer of him. The first opposite party failed to discharge his lawful duty to his consumer and the same is attracted under the provisions of deficiency in service of consumer Protection Act. Due to non-supplying of vegetables by the first opposite party, the complainant is suffered mental torture, worries and he passed severe sleepless nights. The first opposite party harassed the complainant in several ways. Hence, the complainant issued legal notice to both opposite parties on 09.04.2021 called upon the first opposite party to return the sum of Rs.3,16,500/- to the second opposite party or to the complainant with necessary bank loan interest and also pay the damages the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant for causing harassment, mental tortures and worries due to non-supplying of vegetables to the complainant within 10 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice and that failing compliance of the legal demand made by the complainant, he will constrained to take suitable legal action against the first opposite party before consumer Redressal Commission under the provisions of deficiency in service of Consumer Protection Act for all damages, in which event the first opposite party will be mulcted with all the costs some time to pay the loan dues until recovery made from the first opposite party. Both the opposite parties duly acknowledged the receipt of legal notice dated 09.04.2021 issued by the complainant’s counsel. The first opposite party issued reply on 14.04.2021 with false and baseless averments and the complainant denying the said averments. The first opposite party failed to comply with the legal and lawful demands made by the complainant. The office copy of the legal notice dated 09.04.2021, served acknowledgement cards of opposite parties and reply of first opposite party. Further, the first opposite party failed to supply the vegetables to the complainant will clearly show the adamant and unjust activities of the opposite party. Hence the complainant filed this complaint.
2. The written version of first opposite party is briefly as follows:
This opposite party denies the allegations those that are specifically admitted herein and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same not so admitted. He does not know how the complainant has been numbered by this Hon’ble commission without having any jurisdiction to entertain this complaint before this forum. The complainant is unknown to law and therefore the complaint should be rejected in toto. The denying the allegation of the complainant and stating that the complainant purchased from this opposite party for more than four years of credit basis. Further, the complainant has not discharged the entire amount and was always maintaining the due amount nearly 2.3 lakhs with the opposite party. As on 07.01.2021, the complainant was liable to pay a sum of Rs.2,37,367/- towards the balance amount purchased of vegetables from this opposite party. Hence, this opposite party made demand in the first week of the Feb 2021 to the complainant to pay the balance sale amount. But the complainant pleaded that due pay the amount within a month from the business loan from the second opposite party. The complainant also requested this opposite party to issue a quotation applying for loan from the second opposite party. This opposite party did not know what was happened between the complainant and the second opposite party in respect of loan proceedings. On 24.02.2021 the complainant had approached this opposite party and stated that he already applied the business loan from the second opposite party and the bank will credited the amount of Rs.3,16,500/- into the opposite party’s bank account including an amount Rs.1,16,500/- deposited by the complainant. On 26.02.2021 the complainant had approached this opposite party and stated that this opposite party should adjust the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards death due by the complainant and requested to pay balance amount Rs.1,16,500/- directly to the complainant. As per the request of the complainant this opposite party has paid the sum of Rs.1,16,500/- as cash to the complainant and the remaining amount Rs.2,00,000/- has been credited in the sale account due by the complainant to this opposite party and so the complainant is liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.37,367/- to this opposite party as per the balance sheet. Further, this opposite party also raise an objection for regarding the maintainability by the complainant before this Hon’ble Commission. Since, the opposite party dispute between the complainant and the opposite party the contractual nature and having factual complications triable issues which can be decided only by the competent Civil court. Therefore, this opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complainant.
3. On receipt of the notice from this Hon’ble Commission. The second opposite party did not appear, the second opposite party called absent set exparte.
4. Proof affidavit of complainant filed. Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 were marked. Proof affidavit of opposite part filed. Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 were marked. Written argument of complainant not filed. Written argument of first opposite party filed.
5. The Points that arises for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for relief as claimed in the complaint?
3. To what relief, the complainant is entitled to?
6. POINT NOS.1 & 2:
The complainant doing retail vegetables selling business at Nethaji Market, Vellore. He also having an Account in the second opposite party. Since, he is incurring financial distress due to Corona Lockdown, he had approached the second opposite party for loan. The second opposite party also agreed to sanctioned the loan of Rs.2,00,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant obtained a quotation from the first opposite party and submitted to the second opposite party. The second opposite party also released the, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- into the complainant’s SBI account No. 520101015508117 on 25.02.2021. There is a balance of Rs.1,16,500/- in the complainant’s bank account in total Rs.3,16,500/- was balance as on 25.02.2021 itself. The second opposite party released the payment to the first opposite party a sum of Rs.3,16,500/-. After, receipt of the aforesaid sum of Rs.3,16,500/- from the second opposite party. The complainant had approached the first opposite party on several occasion on requested him to supply vegetables. But, the first opposite party did not supply anything to the complainant, they informing some faults and vague reasons and sometimes they informed that the load is not come.
7. On the other hand, the second opposite party insisting the complainant to repay the loan amount. Therefore, the complainant met the second opposite party and directly gave a letter to them mentioning the non-supply of vegetables by the first opposite party and request the suitable action against the first opposite party and request for reimbursement of Rs.3,16,500/- from the first opposite party. Knowing the aforesaid letter, the first opposite party closed his bank account with the second opposite party. Due to non-supply of vegetables by the first opposite party. The complainant incurred heavy financial loss in his business and the first opposite party harassed the complainant in several ways to the lawful consumers of him. The first opposite party failed to discharge his lawful duty and same was attracted Under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, the complainant was issued legal notice to both opposite party on 19.02.2021 calling upon the first opposite party to return the sum of Rs.3,16,500/- to the second opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- by way of compensation. Both opposite parties received legal notice, the first opposite party give reply on 14.04.2021 with false and baseless averments. But, fail to comply with the legal demand of the complainant. The non-supply of vegetables to the complainant is amounting to deficiency in service on the part of the first opposite party. Since, the second opposite party is knowing the aforesaid financial transactions they are added as necessary party for not to insisting the complainant to pay the loan amount till the realization of money from the first opposite party. Since, the there was no response from both opposite parties. Hence, this complaint.
8. The second opposite party Set exparte. But the first opposite party had filed the written version denying the allegation of the complainant and stating that the complainant purchased vegetable from this opposite party for more than four years on credit basis. Further, the complainant has not discharged the entire amount and was always maintaining the due amount nearly 2.3 lakhs with the opposite party as on 07.01.2021. The complainant was liable to pay a sum of Rs.2,37,367/- towards the balance amount for the purchased of vegetables from the opposite party. Hence, this opposite party made demand in the first week of the February 2021 to the complainant to pay the balance sale amount. But the complainant pleaded that within a month he will get an amount from the business loan on the second opposite party. The complainant also requested this opposite party to issue a quotation applying for loan from the second opposite party. This opposite party did not know what was happened between the complainant and the second opposite party in respect of loan proceedings. On 24.02.2021 the complainant had approached this opposite party and stated that he already applied the business loan from the second opposite party and the bank will credited the amount of Rs.3,16,500/- into the opposite party’s bank account including an amount Rs.1,16,500/- deposited by the complainant. On 26.02.2021 the complainant had approached this opposite party and stated that this opposite party should adjust the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards debt due by the complainant and requested to pay balance amount Rs.1,16,500/- directly to the complainant. As per the request of the complainant this opposite party has paid the sum of Rs.1,16,500/- as cash to the complainant and the remaining amount Rs.2,00,000/- has been credited in the sale account due by the complainant to this opposite party and so the complainant is liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.37,367/- to this opposite party as per the balance sheet. Further, this opposite party also raise an objection for regarding the maintainability by the complainant before this Hon’ble Commission. Since, the opposite party dispute between the complainant and the opposite party is contractual nature and having factual complications tribal issues which can be decided only by the competent Civil court. Therefore, this opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complainant.
9. Ongoing through the complainant and the written version and documents filed by the both parties. We have referred to the
Tamilnadu State Consumer Redressal Commission order dated 29.08.2011
Wherein it has been held that, the matter was purely in the realm of breach of contract and did not Constitute a Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has envisaged by the provision Consumer Protection Act. The complainant should have been referred to pursue his ordinary remedy by way of Instituting Civil Suit and no relief should have been granted to him Under the Act.
Further, there are tribal issues such as the complainant stating that the second opposite party credited a sum of Rs.3,16,500/- towards the purchase of the vegetables whereas, the opposite party stating that there is a due of Rs.2,37,367/-. For which they have adjusted from the aforesaid loan amount and adjusted a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and the balance was paid to the complainant. This fact was not disputed by the complainant. Therefore, in our consider opinion, the complainant did not approach this Hon’ble Commission with cleans hands. On this ground as well, this complaint is liable to be dismissed. Hence, these Point Nos.1 and 2 are decided as against the complainant.
10. POINT NO. 7. As we have decided in Point Nos.1and 2 that the complainant has not proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the complainant is not entitled for any relief. Hence, this Point No.3 is also answered accordingly.
In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us in the open Commission in this the 27th February,2023.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER – I MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
LIST OF COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.A1 - Copy of the bank Pass-Book stands in the name of complainant
Ex.A2 - Copy of the quotation issued by the first opposite party
Ex.A3 - Copy of the Bank statement regarding transfer of loan amount to
the bank account of first opposite party from the account of
complainant
Ex.A4 - Copy of the letter submitted by the complainant to the second
opposite party
Ex.A5-09.04.2021- Office copy of the legal notice
Ex.A6 - Served acknowledgement card of first opposite party
Ex.A7 - Served acknowledgement card second opposite party
Ex.A8-14.04.2021- Reply issued by the first opposite party
LIST OF FIRST OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:
Ex.B1 - Complaint M. Dhamodharan statement
Ex.B2 - Copy of complaint receipt
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER – I MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
