Haryana

Ambala

CC/396/2012

AMAR NATH S/O BHAGIRATH - Complainant(s)

Versus

SH SOM NATH PORPRIETOR OF SOM ENGINEERING WORKS - Opp.Party(s)

SARVJEET SINGH

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

       Complaint Case No. : 396 of 2012

                   Date of Institution    : 24.12.2012

                   Date of Decision      :  21.10.2016

 

Amarnath son of Bhagirath R/o 11-D, New Tagore Garden, Ambala Cantt. 

 

……Complainant.

 

Versus

 

Som Nath, Proprietor of Som Engineering Works, 9/9/2, Vishvakarma Nagar,

Near Preet Nagar, Ambala Cantt.

 

……Opposite Party

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

BEFORE:       SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

                       

Present:          Sh. Sarvjeet Singh, Adv. counsel for complainant.

                        Ops exparte.             

 

ORDER.

                             

                        In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant is a carpenter  under the name & style of M/s Amarnath Wood Works and for this purpose  he was required wood cutter, rooter, whole machine, mini saw mill, drill machine and  for the purpose of purchase the above said machinery, complainant contacted Op who is manufacturer and supplier of the abovesaid machinery.   It is further submitted that  as per quotation dated 24.05.2011  of OP,  the abovesaid machinery was of Rs.1,45,000/-.  In view of the quotation of the Op, complainant applied for a loan with State Bank of India, Ambala City. Further it has been stated that complainant placed order for supply of the above said machinery with Op and paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- in cash, as advance money on 10.07.2011. Thereafter, complainant got the loan sanctioned and a cheque in a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- was issued by State Bank of India, Ambala City in the name of OP firm which was handed over to opposite party to complainant on 29.07.2011.  It has been contended that Op promised to supply  the above stated machinery within a period of one month from the date of full payment of the price of machinery i.e. 29.08.2011 but till the date machinery has not been provided on one pretext or the other and ultimately in April 2012 Op flatly refused to supply the machinery. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                     OP did not bother to appear despite notice through registered post. As such, he was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 12.03.2013.

3.                     To prove his version, complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexures C1 to C-6 and closed the evidence.

4.                     We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record very carefully.  Case of the complainant is that  he was requiring some tools for his carpentership work and for this purpose, he took quotation from OP amounting to Rs.1,45,000/- and he paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the OP in cash  vide receipt annexure C-2 and for remaining amount of Rs.1,25,000/-, complainant raised loan of Rs.1,25,000/- from State Bank of India.  The Bank issued a cheque of Rs.1,25,000/- bearing no.025391 dated 29.07.2011 (annexure C-1) in the name of Op firm having account no.30114315216. But despite making the full payment of Rs.1,45,000/- to the Op, he did not supply the tools/machinery to the complainant and flatly refused to supply the same in April 2012. As per complainant, the Op has harassed  him mentally as well as caused loss of money to him.

                        On the other hand, the Op did not contest the complaint as they remained exparte. 

                        In view of the facts of complaint and documents placed on record by complainant, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant has paid full amount of Rs.1,45,000/- to OP i.e. Rs.20,000/- in cash and Rs.1,00,000/-  has been debited  by the Bank in the loan account no.3185899651 of complainant and then credited the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in bank’s account as well as the bank also credited Rs.25,000/- as margin money from Saving Bank account no.31772960438 of complainant to their account  and thereafter issued a cheque of Rs.1,25,000/- directly in the name of Op.  Since, the cheque of Rs.1,25,000/- have been issued by the Bank directly to the OP firm, it can be presumed that the cheuqe has been encahsed by the OP. Further the Op has not come to the court to rebut the contents of complaint and thus we have no other option except to believe the version of complainant duly supported by affidavit. Accordingly, the Op is deficient in providing proper services as well as played unfair trade practice with the complainant for not supplying the tools/machinery  i.e wood cutter , rooter, drill machine etc. to the complainant.  Accordingly, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-  

(i)        To supply the machinery as mentioned in quotation Annexure C-3 or in the alternative to refund the amount of Rs.1,45,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% Per Annum from 01.08.2011 till actual realization.

(ii)       Also to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses for dragging the complainant in unwarranted litigation.

 

                             Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.  

ANNOUNCED ON:  21.10.2016                                                  Sd/-

                                                                                                 (D.N. ARORA)

                                 PRESIDENT    

 

                                                                                                         Sd/-

                           (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                                            MEMBER