SMT. BANDANA ROY, PRESIDENT

            Shortly stated the case of the complainant is that he ordred for 12000 bricks on  14.01.2014 and paid Rs. 50,000/-  for price of the same to the OPs. The OPs promised to supply the bricks at the home of the complainant in between 1^st June to 30^th June of the year. The  Manager of the Brick Field, one Subhas Shit issued receipt after payment of Rs. 50,000/- from the complainant. In the receipt the Manager also noted the date of delivery of the bricks at the house of the complainant. After expiry of the said delivery date, many times the complainant visited the bricks field of the OPs and urged for supply the same but the the OPs did not supply the same. Ultimately on 10.06.2017 the complainant sent notice by registered post requesting the OPs to supply the bricks or return the amount advanced by him with 18% interest.  But all in vain.

Hence, the instant case with the prayers as made in the complaint petition on the allegation of deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.

The OP no 5 appeared and filed petition for expunging his name. The complainant had no objection to such submission of the OP No. 5. So, by order no. 10 dated 06.06.2018 name of the OP no. 5 has been expunged from the cause title of the complaint petition.

            In spite of summons upon the other Ops, none of them appeared to contest the complaint case.  Hence, the case is heard ex parte and fixed for delivery of judgment.

            Point to be considered in this case is whether the case is maintainable and (2) whether Complainant is entitled to the relief(s) sought for by the complainant.

Decision with reasons

            Both the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience.

            We have carefully perused the affidavit of the complainant, the affidavit in-chief and the document filed by the complainant and heard the argument advanced by the Ld. Advocate for the complainant. Considered.

             The complainant has filed this case on the ground that in spite of taking advance money the OPs did not supply bricks nor refunded the advance money which is certainly a deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. So, the case is maintainable as per C. P. Act 1986.

 To substantiate his case the complainant has filed copy of the money receipt dated 07.10.1420 and has filed affidavit in - chief to corroborate his statement made by affidavit. It appears from the said receipt that Manager of the Sagar Madhab Brick Field Sri Subhas Shit received a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for supply of 12000 No.1 bricks including the carrying cost of the bricks up to the house of the complainant. Also it is mentioned in the receipt that the consignment would be delivered by 10.06.2014. 

None appears to question validity of said receipt.

So we are of the considered view that the complainant has successfully proved his case ex parte against the OPs and he is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.

Both the points are answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

That CC/ 593 of 2017 be and the same is allowed ex-parte against all the OP Nos. 1 to 4 .

The OP No. 1 to 4 are jointly and severally directed to pay the complainant an amount of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the said amount from the date of   receipt thereof till full realization of the same.

The said OPs are further directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- towards mental harassment of the complainant and litigation cost of Rs. 3000/- within one month from the date of this order, id, the complainant will be at liberty to put this order into execution.  

Let copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of cost.