Date of Filing: 11.12.2014 Date of Final Order: 11.05.2015
The case of the complainant, Sri Dhananjoy Barman, S/O. Amal Barman in brief is that the Complainant in view to start his construction work paid in advance amounting to Rs.3,90,000/- to the O.P., Amulya Debnath, (Brick field owner) for purchasing brick (65 thousand brick and per one thousand brick value of Rs.6,000/-) on 18/09/2012. On the previously mentioned date, i.e. 18/09/2012 an agreement executed between the parties on condition that the O.P would supply the said 65 thousand brick in two months, Chaitra and Baishak. However, the O.P did not supply the said brick within time to the Complainant. By not getting said brick from the O.P, the complainant with great anxiety met with the O.P and get assurance from him that he would supply the aforesaid brick immediately but till date before filing this case the O.P did not supply the said brick to the complainant.
Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice upon the O.P through Lawyer on 19/07/2014 and the O.P received the said notice on 25/07/2014 but there is no effect. Thus, the Complainant suffered from mental pain and agony due to such deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopting by the O.P.
Hence, the Complainant filed the present case praying for issuing a direction upon the O.P to pay (i) Rs.3,90,000/- as advance money for purchasing brick, (ii) Rs.50,000/- for mental pain and agony, (iii) Rs.5,000/- for harassment, travelling expense and Misc. expenses and (iv) Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost, besides other relief(s) as the Forum deem fit, as per law & equity.
In this case, despite receiving the notice the O.P did not come forward before this Forum to contest the case also in view to non-appearance of the O.P this case was heard in Ex-parte.
The Complainant files Written Argument and Evidence on affidavit with original documents.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the following points necessarily came up for consideration.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the Complainant a Consumer as per Section 2(1) (d) (ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Has the O.P any deficiency in service by violating the agreement as executed between the parties?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief(s) with compensation?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully, perused the entire documents in the record also heard the argument at a length by the complainant.
Point No.1.
The Complainant intended to purchase 65,000/- brick, paid 3,90,000/- to the O.P. for availing proper service in due time and by entering in an agreement the O.P. accepted the same. Thus, the relation of the Complainant with the O.P. as established from the record we are convinced to hold that the Complainant is a “Consumer” as per section 2 (1) (d) of the C.P. Act.
Point No.2.
The O.P, Amulya Debnath is residing within the jurisdiction of this Forum and the total valuation of this case is Rs.4,50,000/- which is far below than maximum pecuniary limit of this Forum i.e. Rs.20,00,000/-. Therefore, this Forum has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to try this case.
Point No 3.
Annexure “A” shows that the Complainant deposited Rs. 3,90,000/- to the Opposite Party on 18.09.2012 as per an agreement executed between the Complainant and the Opposite Party gave assurance for supplying 65,000 brick to the Complainant in the Bengali month Chaitra & Baisakh.
The case of the Complainant is that even after elapsing so many months the O.P. did not supply the bricks that were booked by him on payment of certain amount.
On giving a close look to Annexure “A” “Chuktipatra”it appears that the Complainant entered in an agreement with the Opposite Party on 18.09.2012 wherein it is crystal clear that the Opposite Party had taken Rs. 3,90,000/- as an advance for supplying 1 No. S.B.F. brick to the Complainant with an assurance to supply 65,000 brick to the Complainant in the Bengali month Chaitra & Baisakh. There is proper seal and signature of Govt. Notary and advocate. That Chuktipatra also signed by both parties with witness as such there is nothing to disbelieve the same.
Annexure “B” reveals that a legal notice sent by the Advocate, Abhijit Barman to the Opposite Party on 19.07.2014, which was received by the Opposite Party on 25.07.2014. It is pertinent point to mention that the Complainant send the legal notice for supplying the bricks as early as possible but the Opposite Party did not pay any heed to it. Moreover, the Opposite Party did not come forward to contest the case that seems , the Opposite Party has nothing to say. Further, the desire of the Complainant totally satire by not getting the bricks in due time. Moreover, a huge amount is lying with the custody of the opposite Party. Due to such action and inaction of the Opposite Party the Complainant, suffered mental pain and agony, which is, certainly be termed as Deficiency in Service. The allegation of the Complainant is corroborated with the documents thus, it can safely be said that the Opposite Party is guilty of deficiency in service.
Point No. 4.
In the light of foregoing discussion and considering the materials to its entirety, we have no hesitation to say that the Complainant has been able to prove his case and entitled to get reasonable relief. Thus, the instant case succeeds on its merit.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that,
The DF Case No.86/2014 be and the same is allowed in ex-parte with cost of Rs.2,000/-.
The Opposite Party is hereby directed to refund the advance money of Rs. 3,90,000/- to the Complainant. The Complainant also do get an award of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agonies within 60 days. The ordered amount shall pay to the Complainant directly by the O.P within 60 days failure of which the O.P shall have to pay Rs.100/- for each day’s delay and the amount to be accumulated shall be deposited in the “State Consumer Welfare Fund”, West Bengal.
A plain copy of this order be made available and be sent to each of the parties free of cost by registered post with A/D forthwith as per rules.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Member President
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar
Member Member
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar
