BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : MEDAK AT SANGAREDDY

PRESENT: Sri Patil Vithal Rao, B.Sc., LL.B.,President

Smt. Meena Ramanathan, B.Com., Lady Member

              Sri G.Sreenivas Rao, M.Sc., B.Ed.,LL.B.,PGADR (NALSAR),Member

Monday, the  8^th day of July, 2013

CC. No.15 of 2013

Between:

M/s NAVIDA ENTERPRISES,

Rep: by its Proprietor,

Sri Md. Khadeer,

O/o Shop. No. 2/14/3,

Opp: Novapan, IDA,

Patancheru – 502 319.                                                            …. Complainant

And

1. The Accounts Manager,

ION EXCHANGE (I) LTD.,

Rivira Apartments,

4^th Floor, Plot No. 134,

#6-3-347/9, Dwarakapuri colony,

Punjagutta, Hyderabad – 500 082.

O/o 19/A Phase II, Industrial Development Area,

Patancheru, Medak District.                                              … Opposite party

           This case has come up for hearing on 08.07.2013 in the presence of M/s M. Govardhan & Associates, Advocates and opposite party remaind exparte. On perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Forum delivered the following:

       O R D E R

(Per se G. Sreenivas Rao, Member)

         This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the opposite party to pay the deposited amount of Rs. 15,000/- with interest and to pay a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- along with the costs of the case and any other relief or relief’s the Forum may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

The brief averments of the case are:

                  The complainant is doing a scrap business in the name and style of NAVIDA ENTERPRISES for the past several years. The complainant was offered a contract vide REF: ICD/PAT/NAVIDA/98-99, dated 18.06.1998 with description of scrap items and its rates mentioned in the above said contract along with terms and conditions. As per clause No. 4 of terms and conditions the complainant has deposited Rs. 15,000/- with the opposite party company, the contract was valid up to 30.06.1999. After that the complainant approached for refund of his deposited amount of Rs. 15,000/- which complainant paid at the time of scrap contract dated 18.06.1998, but so far the opposite party company has not refunded to the complainant, though he  visited opposite party head office and the factory on number of occasions. But there was no positive response from opposite party office. Finally the complainant sent a legal notice dated. 30.03.2013 through courier and the opposite party had not responded to it.

2.             The opposite party remained exparte despite service of notice by this Forum.

3.               The complainant filed documents to support his contention and got marked as exhibits A1 to A4 and presented his oral arguments only.

4.               Now the point for consideration is, whether the complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service of opposite party?  If so, to what relief?

Point:

5.               The complainant obtained a “Scrap contract” on 18.06.1998 along with terms and conditions. As per clause 4 of terms and conditions, the complainant is supposed to deposit a sum of Rs. 15,000/- with the opposite party and that deposit will not carry any interest. Further as per clause 2 of terms and conditions, that contract was valid up to 30.06.1999 only. This contract was signed by five (5) persons on behalf of the opposite party’s company viz.: Plant Manager, Quality Control, Purchase Section, Accounts Department and Stores Incharge. 

6.                The contention of the complainant is that he deposited Rs. 15,000/- with opposite party and after the period of the contract, he was not offered any other scrap contract, thus the opposite party ought to have refunded his deposit amount. He further stated that even after sending a legal notice dated. 30.03.2013 the opposite party kept silent. Hence he approached before the Forum.

7.                The complainant proves that he was offered a scrap contract as per Ex.A1. The Ex. A2 is the legal notice dated 30.03.2013 followed by Ex.A3 which is the courier receipt bearing No. BA1259296 dated.29.03.13 and Ex. A4 is courier consignment note.

8.                On careful perusal of the entire case, the complaint does not seem to have been supported with required evidence. The complainant could prove that he secured a scrap contract from opposite party on 18.06.1998. As per the terms and conditions he was supposed to deposit Rs. 15,000/- with opposite party which does not carry any interest and which was valid till 30.06.1999 only.

9.                Whereas the complainant failed to prove the following issues:

a)                As per the scrap contract, below clause 7 of terms and conditions, the complainant was supposed to acknowledge acceptance of contract. No documentary evidence was filed by the complainant to show his acceptance of scrap contract.

b)                 The interest free deposit of Rs. 15,000/- paid to the opposite party is without any proof of evidence.

c)                The said scrap contract from 18.06.1998 to 30.06.1999 only. What type of scrap lifted by the complainant from the opposite party company during that period was also not explained by the complainant.

d)              The scrap contract was signed by (5) officers of the opposite party company, whereas the complainant made only the Accounts Manager as the opposite party, the reasons for which were not given.

e)               The cause of action arose on expiry of 30.06.1999 whereas legal notice was dated 30.03.2013, the complainant failed to prove the acts of commission & omissions during 14 years of time. Thus his claim is barred by limitation.

10.              Hence on all the (4) counts referred above, the complainant failed to prove his case, therefore the opposite party company is not at all liable. Thus the complainant deserves no relief.

11.              In the result, the complaint is dismissed. There is no order as to costs.

                   Dictated to Stenographer, after transcription and correction the order is pronounced by us in the open court today on this the 08^th day of July, 2013.

      Sd/-                                  Sd/-                                         Sd/- 

      MALE MEMBER    LADY MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                 WITNESS EXAMINED

For the complainant:                                            For the opposite parties:-

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For the complainant:                                                   For the opposite parties:-

                    Sd/-                            Sd/-                            Sd/-

MALE MEMBER           LADY MEMBER            PRESIDENT

Copy to:

1. The complainant
2. The opposite parties
3. Spare copy.