Date of Filing : 07/03/2013                                                     Date of Order 31/03/2014

Order No.19, dated 31/03/2014.

No step has been taken for the Complainant. None appears on repeated calls for the Complainant.

Later, on being asked the Ld. Advocate Mr. Rabindra Dey who appeared in this case as an Agent for the Complainant on being appointed by him submits that since after 06-02-2014 the Complainant has not meet him. He also has not contacted over phone and as such he has no instruction from the side of the Complainant.

He further submits that inspite of Notices issued at given different addresses thrice it could not be served upon the Opposite Parties i.e. 1. The Branch Manager, 2. The Manager, 3. Sri Shyamal Barman, (Agent) & 4. Sri Sunil Kumar Mandal, (Agent), all of Technostar Tele Service Pvt. Ltd. of Darjeeling, Kolkata, Cooch Behar.

The Opposite Parties use to install cellular site i.e. Tower/Antenna and requested the Complainant to provide the roof of his house for installing equipments on rental basis. On being agreed they executed an Agreement for the purpose of earning his livelihood.

He deposited Rs. 75,000/- on 11-03-2011 against which the Opposite Party No. 1 issued a Money Receipt. The Opposite Parties installed a Tower/Antenna on the roof top area and the Complainant was received a Rental Approval Certificate from the Opposite Parties on 16-03-2011 as to monthly rent of Rs. 12,500/- but till 07-03-2013 the Opposite Parties did not pay any rent to the Complainant. On 08-06-2011 the Complainant went to the Opposite Party No 1 for rent who told him that due to various factors of the company could not make the payment of rent and it will be solved soon. Thereafter he made several contact for obtaining rent but to no good.

He has prayed for direction upon the Opposite Parties to refund the security deposited amount.

He claimed himself a Consumer of the Opposite Parties and has been suffering from mental pain and agony, harassment and the Opposite Parties have deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

He has prayed for order to refund deposited amount Rs. 75,000/- plus Rs. 10,000/- for deficiency in service plus Rs. 4,000/- towards litigation cost besides other reliefs.

The petition of complaint has been filed on affidavit through Ld. Advocate enclosing Xerox copies of Agreement, Money Receipt, Rent Approval Letter by Opposite Parties letter of the Complainant to the Opposite Party No. 1 (all Xerox copies).

Notice sent under Registered Post but it was received back unserved with note of Not Found Incomplete Address Left etc. Huge postal stamps have been used causing loss of Govt. money without any fruitful result. In the Deed of Agreement the Opposite Party Nos. 3 & 4 are witness of the said Agreement without full particulars. The address of those two Opposite Parties 3 & 4 with portage and address appears non-substantiative inspite of which the Forum issued Notices. They may be personally known to the Complainant and also acted as Agent to negotiable the rental matters of the Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2 but there appears no iota of paper to substantiate that they are the Agent of the Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2.

We have reason to believe that the Complainant has been cheated by the Opposite Parties directly with the help of the Opposite Party Nos. 3 & 4 of Cooch Behar but Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2 are of Darjeeling and Kolkata and there is no iota/whisper as to how the Opposite Party Nos. 3 & 4 came to light as Agent of the Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2. It is a case of tenancy so far.

May whatever it be it further appears that in this case Notice was issued without admission hearing and as such in our considered view this case should have been decided on admission hearing as in no way the Complainant is a Consumer under the C.P. Act, 1986.

Besides, on two consecutive dates no step has been taken for the Complainant and his Ld. Agent also has no instruction.

Hence, we dismiss the case for default/non-prosecution and thus dispose off the case.