Orissa

Rayagada

CC/428/2015

R.Rambabu Dora - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sailendra Kumar Singh - Opp.Party(s)

Self

08 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

 C.C. Case  No.428/ 2015.

P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                    President.

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.                             Member

            R.Ramababu Dora, Prop. Sri Krishna Automobiles, Rayagada,    Po/Ps/Dist.,             Rayagada, Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                 …..…….Complainant

                                                            Vrs

Sri  Sailendra Kumar Singh,S/o Santosh Kumar Singh,Totaguda, Timiri, Po/Ps Tikiri, Dist.Rayagada, Odisha.

                                                                                                 ………..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: Self

For O.P: Set Exparte                       JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that during June,2015 the Opp.Party took automobile parts  on credit and issued two cheques  on 22/07/2015 vide cheque No.043516 for Rs.1,50,000/-  and 0435117 for Rs.2,42,918/-  of Axis Bank, Rayagada Branch in favour of the complainant  and assured him to collect money by encashing  the cheques from his account and it is also assured that if the cheque amounts are paid by him then the cheques issued by him would stand canceled. Thereafter the Opp.Party  neither transacted any purchase nor paid the cheque amount in spite of several demands and when the complainant encashed both the cheques  were returned   by the bank due to insufficient funds. The complainant issued legal notice  to the O.P on 24/09/2015  but the O.p did not pay the cheque amounts and failed to comply the legal notice. Hence, prayed  to direct the O.p  for realization of the cheque amounts and award  Rs.10,000/- for damages and aRs.5000/- towards the cost of litigation. Hence, this complaint.

Being noticed, the Opp.Party   neither appeared   nor  files written version  as such the O.P was set exparte.

                                           FINDINGS

 We proceeded the matter in absence of the Opp.Party  believing the allegations of the complainant. For determination of the case, the following issues are to be answered.

i)                   Whether the complainant is a consumer as per  the definition of C.P.Act1986?

ii)                 Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.ps ? 

iii)               What reliefs the complainant is entitled?

 

Issue No.1

                        The complainant  urged that as the Consumer Protection Act is a benevolent legislation and as an additional remedy available to the consumers, as such as per Sec. 3 of the C.p.Act,1986  the complaint is maintainable . Section 3 of the C.P.Act provides additional remedy in  addition to the remedies provided under  other Acts and it is not in derogation of any provision of any law. The Consumer Forum has therefore jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. Hence, in view of the above submission  of the complainant, it is concluded that  the case of the complainant would fall within the scope and ambit of the Sec.2(i) of the C.P.Act which provides that service means service of any description which is made available to potential users and the complainant is a consumer.

Issue No.2 & 3

                        It is the case of  the complainant  that the O.P  has taken automobile parts  on credit and issued two cheques  on 22/07/2015 vide cheque No.043516 for Rs.1,50,000/-  and 0435117 for Rs.2,42,918/-  of Axis Bank, Rayagada    to which the O.p  never denied   and it is also NOT denied by the O.p that he has not given   any  cheque  .  Since the  Opp.Party  was set exparte   it is believed that the O.P has  taken the automobile parts from the complainant and issued two cheques in favour of  the complainant  to which he bound to pay  to the complainant without any term and condition.  After dishonor of the cheque the complainant  issued legal notice to which the  Opp.Party   remained silent. Hence, it is presumed that   the   Opp.Party knowingly avoiding    to return  the amount  and   it clear that  the Opp.Party is with  an intention not  to return back the amount. Hence, there is clear deficiency in service on the part of the Opp.Party and  this issue is answered in favour of the complainant.  Since the Opp.Party was found deficient in their service, he  is liable to return back  the  cheque amount of Rs.1,50,000/- & Rs.2,42,918/- to the complainant along with compensation for mental agony and harassment undergone by the complainant   . Hence, it is ordered.        

 

 

 

                                                                ORDER

                        From the aforesaid facts  of the case the Opp.Party is ordered to return the cheque amount of Rs.1,50,000/- & Rs.2,42,918/- to the complainant with 9% interest and he is also liable to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- which includes cost of litigation to the complainant  within thirty days of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to file  executing  proceeding  U/c 27 of the C.P.Act,1986 for realization of the amount. 

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this 20^th day of July, 2016 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         

                        A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

Member                                                                                            President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1.     Copy of Cheque No.043516  & 043527 dt.22/07/2015

2.     Copy of Return memo

3.     Copy of advocate notice

4.     Copy of postal receipt and AD

By the Opp.Party:  Nil

                                                                                                 President