Punjab

Sangrur

CC/1700/2015

Gurtej Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sh. R.V.Vashisht - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Vikramjeet Garg

02 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                             

                                                Complaint No.  1700

                                                Instituted on:    23.12.2015

                                                Decided on:       02.05.2016

 

Gurtej Singh son of Gurmail Singh, resident of VPO Chatha Nanhera, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.

                                                                ..Complainant

                                Versus

Shri R.V. Vashisht, Hand Writing & Finger Prints Examiner & Forensic Document Expert, Chamber No.377, Yadwindera Complex, Distt. Courts, Patiala.

                                                        …Opposite party

 

 

For the complainant  :       Shri Vikramjit Garg, Advocate.

For Opposite party   :       Exparte.

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Gurtej Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite party (referred to as OP in short) on the ground that the complainant had filed a complaint under section 420/467/468/471 IPC against one Jaswant Singh son of Madan, resident of Village Hambalwas and Vinod Kumar Bindal, Advocate, Notary Public Sangrur before the court of SDJM Sunam, as such the complainant approached the Op regarding the comparison of signatures of Gurpal Singh son of Dalip Singh, resident of village Mehlan, now at Mansa which was fraudulently appended by Jaswant Singh.  It is further averred that on 24.1.2013, the OP with the permission of the Hon’ble Court clicked photographs from the judicial file of affidavit dated 19.1.2010 in question and further the OP charged an amount of Rs.10,000/- as fee for the same from the complainant in the presence of one Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate Civil Courts, Sunam.  It is further averred that on 24.9.2013, in the preliminary evidence, the OP appeared as a witness in the learned court and produced the report along with photographs in the trial court and in this regard chief examination of the OP was recorded.  It is further averred that thereafter the above said Jaswant Singh and Vinod Kumar summoned as accused by the court. After the appearance of accused persons the complainant again approached the OP regarding his evidence, then the OP demanded Rs.10,000/- more from the complainant to give statement before the court. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant has prayed that the Op be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             Record shows that the OP did not appear despite service, as such, the OP was proceeded exparte on 10.02.2016.

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of report dated 4.3.2018, Ex.C-3 copy of statement of Shri RV Vashisht, Ex.C-4 copy of order dated 2.11.2015 and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have carefully perused the complaint and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.

       

5.             The learned counsel for the complainant has contended vehemently that the complainant availed the services of the OP and paid Rs.10,000/- in the presence of one Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate, Civil Courts, Sunam on 24.1.2013 for giving the report and accordingly the OP with the permission of the Court clicked photographs from the judicial file of affidavit dated 19.1.2010 in question and submitted his report dated 4.3.2013, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-2.  The case of the complainant is that after the appearance of the accused persons the complainant approached the OP to give his evidence, then the Op demanded an amount of Rs.10,000/- more from the complainant, as such, the complainant suffered heavy loss due to non appearance of the OP and the Op is deficient in service by demanding Rs.10,000/- from the complainant for appearance in the court. We have very carefully perused the case file and found that the complainant has not produced on the file any receipt showing the alleged payment of Rs.10,000/- to the OP on 24.1.2013.  Further no affidavit of alleged witness Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate, Civil Courts, Sunam, in whose presence the payment of Rs.10,000/- was made to the OP has not been produced on record. There is no justification from the side of the complainant that why he did not produce the receipt of Rs.10,000/- of the OP and the affidavit of Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu on record.  Moreover, the complainant has to prove the case at his own.  The OP is already exparte. It is worth mentioning here that the complainant has to prove that he had paid the consideration to the Op for availing the services, whereas in the present case, the complainant has not produced any such evidence on record.  In the circumstances, we feel that the complainant has miserably failed to prove his case by producing the cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence on record. 

 

6.             In view of our above discussion, we find no merit in the complaint and the same is dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                May 2, 2016.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                           President

 

 

                                                           (K.C.Sharma)

                                                              Member

                                                       

 

                                                              (Sarita Garg)

                                                                   Member

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.