Orissa

Rayagada

CC/2/2022

Tukuna Rauta - Complainant(s)

Versus

The BDO - Opp.Party(s)

Self

05 Apr 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION RAYAGADA, ODISHA.

 

Date of Institution: 05.01.2022

   Date of Final Hearing: 5.04.2023

         Date of  Pronouncement: 05.04.2023

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 02 / 2022

Sri  TukunaRauta,

S/O: MitikaRauta,

Main Road Amalabhata,Po:Penta,

Dist: Rayagada, 765 017

 

(Through Self for the Complainant)                           …Complainant

 

Versus

1.TheBlock Development Officer,Rayagada.

2.The Project  Director, DRDA, Rayagada.

3.The  Collector,  Emergency  Section, Rayagada

4. The Gram Sevak,  Po:   Penta, Dist: Rayagada

 

(None  for the O.Ps.)                                                  …Opposite Parties

 

Present:          1. Sri Rajendra Kumar Panda, President.

           2. Sri Satish Kumar Panigrahi, Member.

ORDER

Sri  Rajendra  Kumar  Panda, President.

Brief facts of the case:-

Case in hand is the allegation of  deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the O.Ps  for  non payment of  balance amount a sum of Rs.94,880/-  towards  supply of  meals to the  Covid Care Centre, Pentawhich  the complainant sought  redressal.

                This is a complaint  dated. 05.01.2022  from Sri  TukunaRauta,

S/O: MitikaRauta, Main Road Amalabhata,Po:Penta,Dist: Rayagada against  B.D.O., P.D.,D.R.D.A., Rayagada, Collector, Rayagada and Gram Sevak, Penta, Dist:Rayagada.

            Complainant pleaded that  he is running  one hotel with name   & style MaaTaratarini Hotel at  Main Road,Amlabhata  Centre, Rayagada. The complainant  supplied the  meals to the Covid Care Centre,Penta for 58 days  from  4.5.2021  to 30.6.2021 amounting to Rs.1,94,880/-. The complainant  got  Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakhs)only   through the O.P. No.4 on DT.21.08.2021.   On several  approaches  the complainant  through various modes including  through Registered post on Dt.1.12.2021had no avail.  With these  above  contentions the complainant instituted this case U/S-35 of the C.P. Act, 2019 against the O.Ps with a prayer to sought relief.  On  due  process notices were issued, to the  O.Ps but  they  have  not  entered  appearance & rebutted the complaint   of the complainant  by    filing   any  version  to contest  the case.

            Heard the complainant. Perused the record  and the  unrebutted  affidavit  and other documents  filed by  the complainant.

            Basing on the pleadings  of the complainant, this commission   framed the following issues   for  determination:-

ISSUES:-

1.Whether the  complainant  is a consumer  under the O.Ps?

2.Whether the complainant has a cause of action to file the complaint?

3.Whether the complaint is barred by law of limitation?

4.Whether the  services of the O.Ps are deficient  towards the complainant.

5.Whether the complainant  entitled to any reliefs from the O.Ps?

            After hearing to the complainant and  careful  perusal of the documents on record  including postal  Registration  receipts  addressed to the B.D.O.  (O.P. No.1) ,& Collector (O.P. No.3). Retail Invoice  No. Nil  for Rs.94,080/- and for the Rs.1,00,800/-   in respect  of the price  of meals  and the letter bearing  No. 3380/XV-33/2021-GP  Dt. 13.09.2021  addressed  to the  Collector(OP No.3) and   vide Memo No.3381   copy to the  P.D., DRDA(OP No.2)  by the B.D.O.,Rayagada (O.P. No.1)  regarding  the supply   of meals   and the costs   therein.

Issue No.1

It is very clear that  the complainant  is  engaged in hotel business with name and style  MaaTaratarini Hotel  at Amalabheta  Centre, Rayagada  for maintaining his livelihood  by  means  of self employment. The letter  bearing   No. 3380/XV-33/2021-GP  Dt. 13.09.2021  of the O.Ps clearly  support  the averments of  the  complaint.     In which   the O.P mentioned that “Taratarini  Hotel,Amalabheta  Centre   have been  approved   by    the   Block Level purchase  Committee  to  supply the meals  at Covid Care  Centre  functioning situated  at Penta.  The complainant accepted that proposal  to  earn  some thing for his  livelihood by way  of  self  employment.  As  such, the  complainant  falls  with in  the  definition  of ‘Consumer ‘as per  the Section 2(7)(ii)(a)  of C.P.Act, 2019.

            On reading of the  above section  in the  instant case   we observed   the complainant  been  running   the business  at  his own shoulder and being run  for carrying   his  livelihood   by means  of self employment  and   O.Ps  approved  the name of this complainant  to  supply  meals  to   the  Covid  Care Centre  during   the period  4.5.2021 to 30.6.2021  with a  promise  to pay   the  cost  of the said  meals.

            In view  of the discussion above,  the  complainant  is a Consumer under the  O.Ps as envisaged  U/S-2(7)(ii)(a) of C.P. Act, 2019.

            Accordingly   issue No. 1  is answered.

Issue No. 2.        

            The  cause of action  to file the  present case  arose on Dt.2.12.2021 when  he  complaint   served   request  letter  for release    of balance amount   of Rs. 94,880/-  to the O.Ps but no avail.  Accordingly  it answered.

Issue  No.3.

Complaint  filed with in  two years from the date on which the cause of action  has arise and  hence  issue  No. 3  is answered.

Issue No. 4 & 5.

            These  two issues invite common discussion and hence  they are being taken up together. It  came  to  notice after  perusing  evidence on record   the O.Ps didn’t release the claim value  of the  complainant in  respect of his   supply  of meals  to the  Covid  Care Centre situated  at Penta.

The letter bearing   No.  3380/XV-33/2021-GP Dt. 13.09.2021   of the  O.Ps  depicts that “One Covid Care centre  at Penta  was functional  w.e.f.  4.5.2021  to 30.6.2021, 7 Nos. of Doctors, medical staff  and 7 Nos. of  cleaning  and security  staff.

            After being approved  this  complainant  supplied  812 numbers   of meals to the Doctors, Medical staffs and cleaning and security   personnels  deployed   at Penta  Covid  Care  Centre during  the period from 4.5.2021 to  30.6.2021   for the value of Rs.1,94,880/-  and received  Rs.1,00,000/- from the O.P  No.4 on Dt.21.08.2021 but  not received  the remaining  balance  amount   of  Rs.94,880/- till date.

            In view of the  above discussion  the   O.Ps are deficient  towards  the complainant. In fact,  if we put  ourselves in  the   position of a consumer as to how he or she suffered, then we will knew   the negligence act, deficient service and the miscarriage  of justice of the O.Ps.  Further  the present consumer  provide foods  during Covid-19 when there  were no  bodies  coming forward to serve  the personnel  who are working   for the  needy  people during  such pandemic situation  hence  this commission  held that there is gross deficiency   in service  by  taking serious view  of the  default  committed  by  the O.Ps.

            Hence it is ordered.

The   Opposie Parties  collectively or severally   liable  for   the deficiency   to the complainant. As such , the O.Ps  are directed to pay   the legitimate claim  of Rs. 94,880/- for the remaining balance amount  out of  Rs. 1,94,880/- for supply of  meals  and Rs.5,000/-   towards the cost of  litigation within  one month  from the date of  receipt of  this order,failing which  the O.Ps  are  jointly and  severally  shall  pay   a further  sum of Rs.5,000/-  in favour of the  State  Consumer welfare  fund on each  delay  one month.    

Miscellaneous  order if any  delivered by this  commission  relating to this case  stands vacated. 

Pronounced in the open court of this Commission today on this 5^th. Day of  April, 2023 under the  seal  & signature of  this Commission.

Dictated and corrected  by me.

I agree

 

MEMBER                                                                 PRESIDENT

 

 

A copy of this order be provided to all the parties at  free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act,  2019 or they may download same from the confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of order received from this Commission.

The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

 (S. K. PANIGRAHI)                                              (R. K. PANDA)

       MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

 

PRONOUNCED ON 05.04.2023