BY - SRI ASISH DEB, PRESIDENT
Brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the O.P. is the sole proprietor and owner of his business namely- “M/S Chandan Textile”. The complainant , for a big occasion purpose of his family requirement of articles of cotton made he met with O.P. member after elaborate discussion with O.P., complainant agreed to advance for the cotton article/goods from the shop of O.P. For purchasing of cotton goods from the O.P. he approached the O.P. namely “M/S Chandan Textile”. On 13.06.2016 complainant paid Rs. 20,000/- on 27.07.2016 Rs. 50,000/- and on 19.07.2016 Rs. 80,000/- to O.P through bank account of Indian Bank of complainantHe paid total amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the O.P.. After the full payment of the goods through bank OP. disclosed that he must deliver all goods to the O.P. within 30.08.2016 but he did not supply the goods as per order . After several reminders to the O.P. he neither supplied the goods nor returned the money to complainant. The complainant sent a 7 days’ notice on 22.06.2018 to O.P. through his Ld. Advocate Mr. Chandan Kumar Maity, but after receiving the said notice O.P. had not taken any step. The complainant felt mental pain and agony due to unnecessary harassment and non return of the advance money by the O.P. The cause of action arose of this case on 30.08.2016 and 03.07.2018 . In the aforesaid circumstances complainant has been constrained to take the shelter of law. Under such circumstances complainant prays for passing order/orders for returning the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest for compensation of Rs. 20,000/- for harassment, mental pain and agony, loss and damages of for litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- and for other reliefs as per law and equity.
The op has resisted the claim by filing written version thereof. The sum and substance of the written version are that the complaint should be dismissed in limini as there is no deficiency of service and any unfair trade practice found on the part of the O.P. .Every allegation made in complainant petition shall be deemed to have been traversed in seriatim and specifically denied and disputed. Complainant is continuing a business of mattress, pillows etc, and for that purpose he collects cottons and other materials from different persons. After discussion as per petitioner’s requirement O.P. started delivery of cotton goods time to time and as per agreed rate sometimes petitioner made payment through bank transaction which are reflected by business challans and bill of O.P. It is also to be mentioned here complainant gathered all required faith of O.P by paying some amount. And sometimes petitioner sent his hired driver to fetch goods from O.P. In last few times petitioner and his appointed driver ignored to sign on any delivery challans against their receiving goods and when O.P. requested him to make challans of received goods and to continue payment against that goods. Complainant denied threatened him that he will ruin his business either using administration and political influence or by starting false case against him .Being vindictive he sent notice and filed this false and fabricated case against O.P. The instant complaint petition is liable to be dismissed and the reliefs sought for cannot be granted to the complainant.
Points for determination are:
- Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?
- Is the complainant entitled to the relief(s) as soughtfor?
Decision with reasons
Both the points, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.
We have carefully perused and assessed the affidavit of the complainant, written version filed by op, examination in chief of complainant, questionnaire thereto and reply thereof and written notes of arguments filed by the op alongwith receipts and other documents.
Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case it is evident that the complainant being a consumer has alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the op- ; the bundle of facts indicate that this case is maintainable in its present form and in law.
Indisputably the complainant approached for purchasing of cotton goods to the op. On scanning the evidence of complainant it appears that he deposed that On 13.06.2016 he paid Rs. 20,000/- on 27.07.2016 Rs. 50,000/- and on 19.07.2016 Rs. 80,000/- to O.P through bank account of Indian Bank of complainant. He paid total amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the O.P.. After the full payment of the goods through bank OP disclosed that he must deliver all goods to the O.P. within 30.08.2016 but he did not supply the goods as per order .The annextures filed by the complainant it clearly establish that complainant made payment of Rs.1,50,000/-in total but he did not supply the goods in turn as agreed. The documents submitted by complainant corroborate the complaint’s version. The op ,on the other hand has failed to establish his defence to the effect that complainant gathered all required faith of O.P by paying some amounts. And sometimes petitioner sent his hired driver to fetch goods from O.P. In last few times petitioner and his appointed driver ignored to sign on any delivery challans against their receiving goods and when O.P. requested him to make challans of received goods and to continue payment against that goods. Complainant denied threatened him that he will ruin his business either using administration and political influence or by starting false case against him. The op has not cited any independent witness in support of his above defence. The op has not been able to demolish the above noted evidence of the complainant in any way with a view to establishing his claim. It has been clearly established that op has set an instance of unfair trade practice and caused harassment and mental stress to the complainant in the dealing of cotton goods with the complainant.
Consequently, coming to the reliefs to be granted it would be just and proper if the op is asked to refund Rs. 1,50,000/-, the advance money paid for cotton goods alongwith simple interest @ 8% % per annum from the date of filing of this case till the date of actual refund, Rs.5000/-as compensation and Rs.2000/- as towards Litigation cost to the complainant within one month from this date of order.
Both the points are decided accordingly. Thus the complaint case succeeds.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
That the CC/349 of 2018 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP.
The OP is hereby directed to refund Rs. 1,50,000/-, the advance money paid for cotton goods, alongwith simple interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this case till the date of actual refund, Rs.5000/-as compensation and Rs.2000/- as towards Litigation costs to the complainant within one month from the date of this order; in default the complainant will be at liberty to put the order into execution.
Let a copy of the judgment be supplied to each of the complainant and the OP free of cost.
