DATE OF FILING                    :     23-04-2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      03-07-2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER       :     30-01-2015.  

Sri Anil Goel,  

son of  late Radha Raman Goel,  

residing at 63 and 64, Atindra Mukherjee Lane,  

Howrah 711 102. ………………………………………………………  COMPLAINANT.

• Versus -

   

  1.         The  C.E.O.,

  Adams Lift & Escalator Pvt. Ltd.,

  of 34, Ahiripukur Road, Flat no. 4A/B, Front Block,

  Kolkata 700 017.

   

  2.         The Authorised Signatory,

  Adams Lift & Escalator Pvt. Ltd.,

  6-D, Neelambar, 28-B, Shakespeare Sarani,

  Kolkata 700 017………………………………...…………..OPPOSITE PARTIES.

   

                                                  P    R    E     S    E    N     T

   

  President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

  Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

   

                                                   F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

   

• 1. Complainant, namely Anil Goel,by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to refund Rs. 96,000/- with banking interest,  to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs along  with other relief or reliefs as the  Forum may deem fit and proper. 

2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant entered into an agreement with o.ps. for installation of a passenger elevator at the residential premises of the complainant on payment of Rs. 96,000/- on 02.08.2013. and the agreement was to execute the work within 26 weeks as per the clause 5(a) of the quotation as well as proposal with regard to general terms and conditions of the contract for sale. But it is alleged by the complainant that the o.ps. have not acted in accordance with the contract although complainant made several requests. As the complainant is a professional building developer, he already sold out all the flats of the building erected on the schedule premises showing the elevator facility. Due to this utter non action on the part of the o.ps., not only the complainant but also all the flat owners have been compelled to suffer a lot. Although the o.ps. vide their letter dated 26.02.2014 vide invoice no. PRO-1/167/13-14 has asked for a payment of Rs. 1,92,000/- from the complainant. When the complainant asked for theassurance for the installation of the lift, o.ps. remained totally silent. So the complainant did not make any payment and the advance payment of Rs. 96,000/- is still lying with the o.ps. complainant sent legal notice date 06.03.2014but o.p. even after receiving the same remained silent. Hence the case.

3. Notices were served upon the o.ps. But o.ps. did not turn up. So the case was heard ex parte.

4. Two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

    

   DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

   5. Both the points aretaken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the complaint petition along with annexures filed by the complainant and noted its contents. Complainant has paid Rs. 96,000/- in total through cheque dated03.8.2013to the o.ps.’ company. For which they supplied the raw materials at the schedule premises only on 26.02.2014 which was informed to the complainant vide their letter dated 26.02.2014 with therequest of making further payment of Rs. 1,92,000/- as early as possible. At the same time we have considered the proposal dated 30.7.2013 given by the o.ps. to the complainant along with the technical specification of the elevator in question. So from the very beginning o.ps. were making delay as when they received the cheque on 03..08.2013, they supplied the first phase of raw materials only on 26.02.2014Wherefrom it is crystal clear that the o.ps. were not in a mood to execute the job within the stipulate period. Which compelled the complainant to file this case with the aforesaid prayers. We all know that the lift is an utmost important issue in a multistoried building and due to o.ps.’ severe non action and negligence, complainant has lost his reputation as a developer which should not be allowed to be perpetuated. Moreover, the o.ps. have not cared to appear before the Forum even after receiving summons. No W/V has been filed by them which clearly shows that they have nothing to put forward in their favour. And the complaint petition remains unchallenged and uncontroverted. And we have no difficulty to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant.O.ps. have miserably failedto keep promise which certainly amounts to deficiency inservice coupled with unfair trade practice on theirpart. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 246  of 2014 ( HDF  246  of 2014 )  be  allowed ex parte  with  costs  against  the O.Ps.     

      That the  O.Ps. are  jointly and severally directed   to refund the amount of  Rs. 96,000/- within one month from this order  i.d., @ 9% p.a. interest shall be charged on the entire decreetal amount till actual payment.

      The complainant do get an award of Rs. 15,000/-  as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost and o.ps.  are  directed to pay the same within one month from this order i.d. amount shall carry an interest @ 9% p.a. till actual payment

      The complainant is  at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

             Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                   

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.