M/s Shree Hari Fabricators,

Bathu Basti, Port Blair

Appellant

                                                                                                                                             vs

Director

Department of Civil Supplies,

Port Blair

 

The Deputy Director,

Department of Civil Supplies,

Port Blair                                                                                                                                                          Respondents

 

Present:

1. Justices S.N Bhattacharjee, President, State Commission.

2. Shri Bimal Behari Chakervarty, Member, State Commission.

3. Smti Vijay Laxmi, Member, State Commission.

Dated: 30/11/2006

1. This is an appeal preferred by the Complainant against the final order passed by the district Forum n 28/9/2005, whereby the Forum allowed a sum of Rs. 6125.00 + interest on that amount @ 6 % per annum from 2/9/96 till recovery + compensation of Rs.5000.00 + Rs.200.00 as cost by way of an ex-party award.

2. The appellant herein filed an application under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Civil Supply Department, Port Blair, Andaman before the District Forum alleging that it submitted quotation for the purchase of empty drums and empty polythene bags on 4/1/96. The said quotation was accepted by the opposite party which was due to supply the above two articles at a price and quantity fixed by the department in accordance with the quotation. The complainant deposited the amount in two instalments on 14/2/96 and 2/9/96 by challan. The Complainant got delivery of empty drums but did not get 1750 Nos. of  empty polythene bags. The Complainant inspite of repeated claims did not get items and ultimately sent a legal notice through his Advocate on 20/9/04.

Having received no reply thereof, he filed this petition before the Forum below.

3. The Respondent contested the case or maintainability point and having lost that point did not further contest the case. The Forum below, therefore, passed an ex-party award on the evidence of the Complainant awarding the compensation as stated above. The Respondent paid the amount under the award but the Complainant being aggrieved with the inadequate amount of compensation passed by the Forum has come up with this appeal.

4. The Appellant has challenged the judgment passed by the Forum below on the following grounds:

•        The compensation of Rs.500 awarded by the Forum is too low

•        The Forum below erred in assessing the mental agony, injury, loss of time and energy due to non-delivery of bags

•      The forum below granted 6 % interest but ought to have granted 18% per annum from 2/9/96 

•       The award of Rs.200/- as cost is too low and the Forum below took an unduly lenient against the deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent which is very important Govt. Department

•         The Forum below did not appreciate with the cost of polythene bags at the relevant time of passing the judgment was more than double than the

Original cost of rs. 6125/-.

    

5. The Respondent contested the appeal on the ground that the claim of the Appellant for a sum of Rs. 1, 32,125.00/- has no legal basis, The forum below rightly passed a sum of Rs.14,754/- which has already been paid to the Appellant.

6. Admittedly, the amount deposited by the Claimant/ Appellant with the respondent has been refunded to the Appellant along with 6% interest. In other words, had this amount been deposited with the bank, the Appellant would get the sum as awarded. In addition to this, Rs.5000/- has been awarded by the Forum as compensation. The Appellant has challenged this amount as too low in view of the fact that he had to attend the office of the Respondent for a long period of time. He has also challenged the cost of Rs.200/- as being too low.

7. It is to be noted that while adducing oral evidence the claimant did not explain the heads of claims on oath. Instead thereof, he accepted the plaint as evidence. According to the Appellant, the Petitioner’s claim has been accepted as evidence which remains unchallenged. Therefore, the Forum ought to have accepted the claim  as unchallenged and the Forum below erred in law in awarding a compensation which is too low.

8. It is to be noted that the interest and compensation which have been allowed by the forum below never becomes or can never become equivalent to the actual loss or harassment suffered by a party. No satisfactory evidence on the point is possible to be adduced by the Complainant. It is a mental process of calculation which cannot be the subject matter of scrutiny. We therefore, do not like to interfere with the amount awarded by the Forum below in this respect. In another words, we are not at all inclined to interfere with the judgment and award passed by the Forum below. The Appeal is dismissed. No cost.

9, In this connection, we express our deep concern and dissatisfaction with the working of the Civil Supplies Department at fort Blair. It is really a matter of great concern that due to indifference and inaction regarding return of money or materials and due to non-supervision of work by senior officers the Government sustained a loss of a few thousands without having  face to contest the claim. Perhaps public money is everybody’s money and can be utilized in covering the misdeeds of Government servants. Inspite of our best endeavour we cannot but comment that the report of Secretary filed before us is of no help as to find out the truth. It leads us nowhere. However, we close the matter here as ten years have already lapsed .