Punjab

StateCommission

CC/35/2014

VINAY SETIA, ADVOCATE - Complainant(s)

Versus

SANJEEV BHUSRI, ADVOCATE - Opp.Party(s)

MANMOHAN UPNEJA/ANUPAM

06 Jul 2015

ORDER

                                                               FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH

 

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,  PUNJAB

          SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.

 

 

                   Consumer Complaint No.35 of 2014

 

 

                                                          Date of Institution: 17.02.2014  

                                                          Date of Decision : 06.07.2015

 

Vinay Satia, Advocate S/o Sh. Harish Chander Setia, aged 62 years, is resident of House No.B/232, Jullelal Colony, Opposite Recreation Club, Near Civil Lines, Fazilka

 

 

                                                                             …..Complainant…..

                                                Versus

 

 

Sanjeev Bhusri, Advocate, practicing in District Courts, Fazilka, Punjab and permanent resident of # 1709, Chugh Street, Fazilka 152123 (Punjab)

 

 

                                                                             ….Opposite Party….

 

         

Consumer Complaint U/s 17(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended up to date).

Quorum:-

 

 

          Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member.

          Shri Harcharan Singh Guram, Member.

 

 

Present:-

 

 

          For the complainant                   :  Ms. Anupam, Advocate

          For the Opposite parties            :  Ex-parte

 

          . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

J. S. KLAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

                                     

           The complainant Vinay Setia  has filed this complaint U/s 17 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (in short the "Act) against the OP on the allegations that complainant hired the services of the OP as a counsel to initiate legal proceedings on his behalf in the civil suit and criminal proceedings in the Civil Court Fazilka. The details of the cases, for which OP was hired  as counsel by the complainant, are as under :-

S.No.	Particulars
1.	Vinjay Setia versus Jathedar Jagdev Singh Educational and Welfare Society For Suit for Eviction and Possession of property
2.	Vijay Setia  versus J.J.S. Fuels Pvt. Ltd. Fazilka through Gurjinder Singh Grewal For Execution
3.	Vijay Setia versus. Gurdas Chand Girdhar For complaint of cheque dated 25.04.2011 of Rs.3,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act.
4.	Vijay Setia versus. Gurdas Chand Girdhar
	For complaint of cheque dated 15.06.2011 of Rs.3,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act.
5.	Vijay Setia versus Gurdas Chand Girdhar For complaint of cheque dated 16.05.2011 of Rs.4,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act.
6.	Vijay Setia versus Gurdas Chand Girdhar For complaint of cheque dated 31.10.2010 of Rs.10,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act.
7.	Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal etc. For Suit for recovery of Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment etc.
8.	Vijay Setia versus Gurdas Chand Girdhar For suit for recovery of Rs.10,00,000/- (cheque Rs.10,00,000/- of dated 31.10.2010) with interest @ 18% p.a along with future interest @ 18% p.a till its realization and costs etc.

 

The complainant availed the services of the OP in the above-referred cases to institute them in the court on his behalf. The cases at serial no.1 to 6, as depicted in the above table, were filed by the OP, but cases at serial no.7 and 8 were not filed by OP in the court at all on behalf of complainant.  The complainant could not appear personally in the said matters due to his old age and hence he availed the services of OP for this purpose to defend him. At one chance, he visited the court on such false date and found that no such case titled as Vinay Seta Versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar was filed by the OP on behalf of the complainant in the court. The complainant applied for the certified copy of the documents and it was received back with the remarks that there was no such file on the court record and no such case was pending threin. The application no.5248 dated 04.12.2013, application no.5299 dated 09.12.2013 and application no.5301 dated 09.12.2013 were received back with the said remarks from the registry of the concerned clerk on 4.12.2013, 13.12.2013 and 10.12.2013. The OP gave false dates and false names of the courts to the complainant with regard to his cases. The OP had shown the complainant fourteen stamp papers worth Rs.70,400/- for court fee, but did not use them for filing the court cases. The OP has not filed the complaint case against Gurjinder Singh Grewal on behalf of the complainant for mental harassment despite payment of the counsel fee of Rs.19,500/- for purchases of stamp papers to him. The complainant incurred the expenses of Rs.2,00,110/- towards the whole litigation process without any result. The details of the expenses incurred by the complainant at the instance of the OP are tabulated as under :

 

Date	Particulars of expenditure	Expenses
08.05.2010	For part counsel fee	Rs.10,000/-
24.05.2010	Counsel fee	Rs.35,000/-
24.05.2010	For stamp papers in Vinay Setia vs. Gurdas Chand Girdhar and Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar	Rs.20,600/-
27.11.2010	Copy apply fee in cases which were never filed	Rs.6,000/-
04.05.2011	Time bound charges in Vinay Seta versus Gurjinder Singh Grewal etc (case was actually never filed)	Rs.10,000/-
24.06.2011	Purchase of stamp paper in case titled Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar for suit for recovery of Rs.10,00,000/- (case was actually never filed)	Rs.70,400/-
17.12.2011	For affidavits in Vinay Setia versus. Gurdass Chand Girdhar etc. (case was actually never filed)	Rs. 2,500/-
03.04.2012	For handwriting experts charges in Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar (case was actually never filed)	Rs.4,210/-
24.04.2012	Incidental expenses in Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar (case was actually never filed)	Rs.2,500/-
26.10.2012	For non bailable warrants in Vinay Setia versus  Gurdass Chand Girdhar (case was actually never filed)	Rs.8,000/-
18.03.2013	Stay proceedings charges in Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar. (case was actually never filed).	Rs.2,500/-
20.07.2013	Proclaimed offender charges in Vinay Setia versus Gurdas Chand Girdhar (case was actually never filed)	Rs.6,900/-
23.08.2013	For obtaining of copies for case Vinay Setia versus Gurdass Chand Girdhar which was actually never filed	Rs.2,000/-
22.10.2013	Suit of recovery of Rs.2,50,000/- in Vinay Setia versus  Gurjinder Singh Grewal etc. (case was actually never filed)	Rs.19,500/-
Total		Rs.2,00,110/-

 

The OP failed to file the suit for recovery despite request of the complainant and hence complainant was forced to hire the services of another counsel to file the said case in District Court Fazilka and he had to pay other amount to him, besides expenses of the case. The OP has not filed case against Gurdas Girdhar for dishonor of cheque of Rs.10 lac on behalf of complainant, which was issued on 31.10.2010  and the same became time barred. The OP has not returned the brief of the case and blank signed papers by the complainant before OP in good faith. The complainant has alleged that he is entitled to compensation of Rs.10 lac for time barred case as stated above, Rs.2,50,000/- for not filing the case titled as Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal and other expenses of Rs.2,00,100/- along with interest @ 18% per annum  on the amount of Rs. 6,31,773/-. The complainant has, thus, prayed by filing this complaint that OP be directed to pay Rs.25,81,873/- to complainant along with interest from the date of filing the complaint till its actual payment.

2.      Notice of this complaint was sent to OP on 28.02.2014. Notice was duly received back as served on 25.04.2014. The OP failed to appear before this Commission despite receiving notice. The OP was set exparte by this Commission on 25.04.2014.

3.      The complainant tendered in exparte evidence the affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-A, affidavit of Ayush Seta Ex.C-B, application dated 9.12.2003 Mark C-1, application dated 9.12.2013 Mark C-2, application Mark C-3, list of cases March C-4, stamp papers Mark C-5/1 to March C-5/14, another stamp papers March C-6/1 to March C-6/3, the format given by the OP in his own handwriting to complainant to exonerate him March C-7 and thereafter tendered additional evidence affidavit Ex.CA-1 and certified copy of cheque dated 31.10.2010 of Rs.10 lac.

4.      We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have also examined the exparte evidence on the record. The complainant has pleaded in this case that he availed the services of the OP to conduct legal cases on his behalf, as detailed in the table mentioned in para no.2 of the complaint and cases are at serial no.1 to 8. The grievance of the complainant is that the OP filed the case mentioned at serial no.1 to 6 in the courts, but had not filed the case titled as Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal for suit of recovery of Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and another case Vinay Setia Vs.  Gurdas Chand Girdhar for suit of recovery of Rs.10 lac on the basis of cheque dated 31.10.2010. The complainant further pleaded that due to old age and medical problem, he could not himself appear in person to conduct the above cases. He engaged the services of OP/Sanjeev Bhusri Advocate to represent him in the above-referred legal cases in the courts. He further pleaded that on one chance, he went to the court and found that the case titled as  Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal was not actually filed by the OP on behalf of the complainant in the court at all. The complainant applied for certified copy of the documents and received the remarks "no such case filed or pending in the court". The complainant received back application no. 5248 dated 04.12.2013, application no.5299 dated 09.12.2013 and application no.5301 dated 09.12.2013 with the remarks of the registry of the court about them.  The complainant further pleaded that the OP gave false dates and false names of the courts to him despite the fact that the OP has not filed cases in the court on his behalf. The allegation of the complainant is that OP had shown the fourteen stamp papers worth Rs.70,400/- to the complainant, but, in fact, had not used them. The OP had not filed the case against one Gurjinder Singh Grewal for compensation for mental harassment despite receipt of counsel fee of Rs. 19,500/- from the complainant for purchase of the stamps. The OP further pleaded that he incurred the expenses of Rs. 2,00,110/- on the litigation process and table of the cases is set out in Para No.8 of the complaint. He further pleaded that he was forced to hire the services of another counsel due to act and conduct of the OP and was made to spend further money. The complainant has sought compensation of Rs. 25,81,873/- from the OP along with interest and further classified it that the amount of Rs.10 lac for time barred and Rs. 2,50,000/- for not institution of the case titled Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal and Rs.6,31,773/- another expenses and Rs. 5 lac for damages for harassment caused by the OP. The complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.C-A on the record in support of his averments, as pleaded in the complaint. The complainant also placed on record the affidavit of Ayush Setia his son in support of his averments. The complainant also placed on record the additional affidavit of Vinay Setia, vide Ex.C-A . The complainant also brought on record by way of additional evidence, copy of the application no.7062 is Mark C-1 containing remarks that I have no file of this case, another application no.7064 is Mark C-2 containing remarks that no such case is pending in the court, another application no.6988 is Mark C-3 containing remarks that no such case is pending, Mark C-4 is cause list of cases alleged to be supplied to the complainant by the OP. Ex.C-5/1 to Ex.C-5/3 are copy of stamp papers. Mark C-7 is unsigned document but since it is not signed by any person, hence no significance can be attached to it by us. 

5.      From the appariasel of the above exparte evidence on the record and hearing the respective submissions of counsel for the complainant, we find that the affidavit placed on record by the complainant Ex.C-A and by Ayush Setia Ex.C-B cannot be ignored as they have gone un-rebutted on the record in the exparte evidence. There is categorical assertion on oath by the complainant that he engaged OP as a legal counsel after paying money to him to conduct the legal proceedings on his behalf. The allegations stands substantiated by above-referred exparte evidence that OP has not instituted the case at serial no.7 in the table titled as Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Singh Grewal for suit of recovery of Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and another case Vinay Setia Vs.  Gurdas Chand Girdhar for suit of recovery of Rs.10 lac  on the basis of cheque dated 31.10.2010 on the record. Not filing the case in the court despite instructions of the litigant is a clear case of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OP, who is a legal practitioner. The complainant applied to the respective courts for getting status of the cases, but it was reported that there was no such file of the cases pending threin, meaning thereby, that no such cases were pending in the court. Mark C-1 is copy of the application given by complainant with the report "I have no file on the record", Mark C-2 is application no.7064 with the report that "No such case is pending." Mark C-4 is copy of list of the cases, in case serial no.7 and 8 the dates are recorded as 16.01.2014 and 14.01.2014, but actually no such cases were filed. The complainant also purchased the stamp papers Mark C-5/1 to C-5/14 of the denomination of Rs.5000/- each, totaling Rs.70,000/- in case Vinay Setia Vs. Gurdas Girdhar, suit for recovery in the court of ACJ Fazilka but actually they went unutilized and have not been used by OPs in the Court on behalf of complainant. In addition to that, the complainant also purchased stamps in case Vinay Setia Vs. Gurjinder Grewal, suit for recovery as damages/compensation before the Court of ACJ Fazilka, which are Mark C-6/1 to C-6/3 on the record of the denomination of Rs.5,000/- each, totaling amount of Rs.15,000/-. The total amounts of the above referred stamp papers of Rs.85,000/- of the complainant went un-utilized and went spoiled due to act of the OP in not filing the cases in the Court on behalf of the complainant for which he was specifically engaged by him.

6.      In view of our above-referred discussion, we accept the complaint of the complainant and the complainant is held entitled to recover the compensation amount of Rs.85,000/- from OP for the expenses incurred by the complainant on the purchases of the stamp papers, which were spoiled due to unfair act and conduct of the OP in this case. In addition to that, complainant also suffered the deprivation of his legal right due to deficient act of the OP and we further award the compensation of Rs.75,000/- to the complainant. The complainant is also awarded the amount of Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses. The above-referred total amount of compensation i.e. Rs.1,75,000/- be paid by the OP to complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the complaint till its actual payment.

7.       Arguments in this complaint were heard on 01.07.2015 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties.

8.      The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

 

                                                                          (J. S. KLAR)

                                                             PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

                                                         (HARCHARAN SINGH GURAM)

                                                                                MEMBER

 

July 6   2015.                                                                 

(ravi)