Orissa

Rayagada

CC/143/2017

Sri Ananta Paleswar Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Pranati Sahoo S.Mobility Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Self

01 Dec 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 143 / 2017.                                       Date.  01   .  12 . 2018.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                   President

Sri GadadharaSahu, .                               Member.

Smt.  Padmalaya  Mishra,                          Member

Sri Antta  Paleswar Behera,  S/O: Late  Anata Parama  Behera, Near Jagannath Temple, Dist: .Rayagada,  State:  Odisha. Pin No. 765 001.                                  …….Complainant

Vrs.

  1. Sri Prasant Sahoo, S. Mobility  Ltd., AT: Sahid Nagar, Po:Bhubaneswar, State:Odisha.
  2. 2.The General Manager, Spice retail Ltd., Spice Global knowledge park, 19-A-19-B, Sector-125, Noida- 201301, Utter  Pradesh.                                  .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Sri Pradeep Das,  Advocate, Rayagada..

For the O.Ps :- Set Exparte.

 

 J u d g e m e n t.

 

The present dispute arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant  alleging deficiency in service  against the afore said O.Ps for non  refund of deposited amount a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards security deposit and Rs.10,000/- towards parts to continue the service centre. The brief facts of the case is briefly summarised  hereunder.

That the complainant  as per the instruction of the O.P. No.1 has deposited the amount with the  O.P. No.2  bank account  in shape of  on line  account deposit a sum of Rs.35,000/- on Dt. 4.8.2014  for opening of service centre at Rayagada(Odisha). The complainant is an un employed and trained graduate having  good and royal name in the  locality.  Till May, 2016  the complainant has given  service  to the company.  But suddenly  during the month of May 2016 without intimating the complainant  the O.Ps have stopped the Spice mobile service centre at Rayagada.   But till date the O.Ps have not refunded the security deposited amount and  advance of spares amount totaling Rs.35,000/- in spite of  repeated  contact with the O.Ps through E-Mail inter alia phone call.    Hence this C.C. case. The complainant prays the forum direct the O.Ps. to  refund the  above  amounts with interest, compensation  and such  other relief  as the forum deems fit and proper for the best interest of justice. 

On being noticed  the O.Ps neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  05 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.Ps.  Observing lapses of around 1(One) year   for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  the  counsel for the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps. The action of the O.Ps are against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.P. set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

          We therefore constrained to  proceed to dispose of the case, on its merit. 

          Heard from the complainant.   We perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the complainant.

         FINDINGS.

                Undisputedly  the   complainant has   credited  Rs.35,000/- on Dt.4.8.2014  through on line transaction   in the bank account  of the   O.P. No.2 (copies of the E-mail  letter dt.4.8.2014 of the O.P.1 addressed to the  complainant  which is marked as Annexure-I). Again there is no dispute the O.Ps. have discontinued  the   spice  mobile  service  centre at Rayagada  on Dt. 9.5.2016(copies of the  E-Mail Dt.9.5.2016   of the   O.Ps  is   in  the file which is marked as Annexure-2).

 

The main grievance of the complainant is that  after discontinued of the service centre on Dt.  9.5.2016  till the O.Ps have not refunded  the security deposit and parts price amounting to Rs. 35,000/- in spite of  repeated E-Mail and phone call. and when asked the reason the O.Ps. have  silent. Hence the  C.C. petition filed by the complainant  to get  the  above  amount with interest ,  compensation and cost.

It further appears that prior to filing   of complaint, the complainant had issued  letter through  E-mail  on    Dt. 24.10.2016 to the O.Ps narrating the above matter i.e.  the service centre was discontinued on Dt. 9.5.2016 but  till now the settlement was  not done. The complainant has lot of problem, to clear  dues as soon as possible.   The  E-Mail  was duly served on the O.Ps.(Copies of the E-Mail Dt.24.10.2016   is in the file which is marked as Annexure-3 )   but they failed to furnish reply to the said E-Mail. Hence it appears that the O.Ps. have been negligent and callous regarding the complaint of the complainant.

During the course of exparte hearing  the complainant  annexed  certain documents such as the  E-Mail letter Dt. 4.8.2014 of the O.Ps addressed in favour of the complainant  for deposit of money a sum of Rs. 35,000/- for opening of  Spice mobile service centre at Rayagada. Further  E-Mail letter Dt. 9.5.2016 of the O.Ps addressed to the complainant  regarding discontinue  of  spice service centre . Again  E-mail correspondence reminder  to the  O.Ps. by the complainant  for refund of security deposit and spares price amounting to Rs.35,000/-.

After carefully examining the evidence on record, we find no cogent reason  to disbelieve or discard the evidence already adduced by the complainant. The documentary evidence  tendered by the complainant clearly tends support and absolute corroboration   to  the evidence.  

In absence of any rebuttal materials from the side  of   O.Ps  there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence put forth  by the  complainant  before the forum  whose evidence  suffers from no infirmity. The evidence adduced by the complainant  clearly leads us to arrive at a just conclusion that there is not only deficiency  in service  but also negligence  on the part of the O.Ps in not refunding the above  amount  as per the  provisions laid down under section 14 of the  C.P. Act.

On careful analysis   of the evidence on record both oral and documentary, we are clearly of the opinion  that  inspite of doing the needful, the O.Ps are failed to redress grievances  regarding the deficiency in service and as a result the complainant was constrained  to file this complaint before the forum claiming the relief as sought for.  In that view  of the matter the O.Ps are liable.

The  learned counsel for the complainant  submitted that   the above  service  centre was the only source  of livelihood  and he had  paid the above amount to the O.Ps by raising  hand loan from the friends and relatives.  Besides having that’s why suffered  by close of the  service centre  to its entirety, now he is under an obligation to repay the  hand loan amount  by way of  installments including  interest.  Further the complainant is a  qualified unemployed trained graduate. We fail to understand  as to why the  O.Ps   did not  refunded  the above     amount  to the complainant. In this  situation, an award of compensation to the  complainant by way of  interest  @  Rs. 9%  interest  per annum from  DT.09.05.2016   on the amount a sum of Rs.35,000/-   till realization  for the harassment and mental agony suffered by the complainant appears to be perfectly justified.

This forum find there is gross deficiency and negligence on the part of the O.Ps  for non  refunding  the  above  amounts which  is a genuine claim of the complainant.

Hence to meet  the  ends  of  justice,  the following   order is  passed.

                                                            ORDER.

            In  resultant the complaint petition stands allowed in part  on exparte  against  the O.Ps

                        The O.P  No. 2 is  ordered to refund  Rs. 35,000/- towards security amount and spare  parts  price to the complainant along with interest @ Rs.9% per annum from DT.09.05.2016   till realization besides to pay Rs.2,000/- towards litigation expenses.  

            The O.P. No.1 is ordered to refer the matter to the  O.P. No.2 for early compliance  of the above order.

            We therefore issued a “Cease and Desist” order against the O.Ps. directing  him to stop such a practice  forthwith and not to repeat in future. 

            The O.Ps are  ordered to comply the above direction within one month from the date of  receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty  to entitled  18% interest  per annum  from the date default  till realization . Service the copies of the order to the parties.

Dictated and corrected by me

Pronounced on this 1st. day of   December, 2018.

MEMBER.                                            MEMBER.                                                        PRESIDENT.

 

 

 

 

 

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.