BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSALFORUM,
SHIMLA,H.P
.
Complaint No. 68/2012
Presented On: 14.3.2012
Decided On: 12.3.2015
………………………………………………………………………..
..
Sh. Nitesh Negi, S/o Sh. Jiwan Singh Negi, R/o VPO Jhakhri, Tehsil
Rampur, District Shimla, H.P.
…..Complainant
Versus
M/s Sky Line Marketing Enterprise, through its Manager, Head Office at
Krishen Dev Building, Main Chowk Dhalli, Shimla-12,H.P..
…..Opposite party
………………………………………………………………………………..
CORAM
Sh. K.S.Chandel, President
Smt. Yogita Dutta, Member.
Sh. Subneet Singh Chauhan, Member
………………………………………………………………………………..
For the complainant: Ms. Shikha Chauhan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party: Ex-parte.
………………………………………………………………………………..
ORDER:.
K.S.CHANDEL,( District Judge) President
The complainant Nitesh Negi has preferred this
complaint under section 11 & 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
against the opposite party( hereinafter referred as OP for short)
claiming deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice by the
OP. The complainant has pleaded and claimed that in the month of
March, 2011 the OP proposed its product of organic medicines for
sale and asked the complainant to deposit Rs. 30,600/- for supply of
such medicines along with authorization letter/ documents and, as
such, the complainant deposited Rs. 30,600/- with the OP on
8.3.2011 against the proper receipt Annexure A-1. The complainant
has pleaded and claimed that the OP supplied medicines to the
amount of Rs. 10,200/- on 9.4.2011 vide receipt Annexure A-2 and
thereafter the OP has failed to supply the medicines to the remaining
amount of Rs. 20,400/- despite request by the complainant ,as such,
the complainant has claimed deficiency in service as well as unfair


trade practice and thereby has sought direction to the OP to refund
Rs. 20,400/- with interest and further compensation including
litigation expenses. The complaint is duly supported with an affidavit
of complainant.
2. The OP has failed to contest the plea of the complainant and
thereby has been proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated
29.4.2013.
3. We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and have
gone through the case file with minute care.
4. The complainant in his affidavit including the complaint has
relied upon receipt Annexure A-1 dated 8.3.2011 which amounts to
Rs. 30,600/- paid by the complainant to the OP and Annexure A-2 the
supply of medicines by the OP to the complainant on 9.4.2011 to the
amount of Rs. 10,200/- . Therefore, the OP has failed to supply the
medicines to the amount of Rs. 30,600/- to the complainant despite
receiving this amount vide receipt Annexure A-1 and has only
supplied medicines to the amount of Rs. 10,200/- vide Annexure A-2
and as such, it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair
trade practice. Therefore the present complaint ex-parte is allowed and
the OP is directed to pay Rs. 20,400/- to the complainant along with
interest @9% P.A from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 14.3.2012
till realization and further OP is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as
compensation for mental harassment as well as litigation expenses.
The OP is directed to pay this amount within 45 days from the receipt
to the copy of the order. Hence, the present complaint stands allowed.
Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per rules.
Announced on this 12th day of March ,2015
( K.S.Chandel)
President
(Yogita Dutta) (Subneet Singh Chauhan)
Member Member
(Mahajan)