DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 30th day of May, 2019
C.D Case No. 99 of 2016
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
1. Sri Akshaya Kumar Panda
S/o: Late Srikanta Panda
Vill: Ogalpur,
Po: Geltua,
Ps: Bhadrak (R),
Dist: Bhadrak
2. Sri Amit Kumar Khandei
S/o Kailash Chandra Khandei
At: Uttargadia,
Po: Sarsada,
Ps: Bhandaripokhari,
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. The Director, Bharti Airtel Ltd.
Aravali Crescent- I, Nelson Mandela Road,
Vasant Kunj, Phase- II, New Delhi- 110070
2. The Manager, Bharti Airtel Ltd.
Infocity 6th Floor,
Chandaka Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751024
3. The Zonal Business Manager
Bharti Airtel Ltd.
Balasore Zonal Office,
Padchupada, Police Line Square, Balasore
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Sri N. C. Mohanty & Others, Adv
Counsel For the O.Ps No. 1 & 2: Sri Tapan Kumar Harichandan & Others, Adv
Counsel For the OP No. 3: Set Ex-parte
Date of hearing: 17.10.2016
Date of order: 30.05.2019
RAGHUNATH KAR, PRESIDENT
This dispute arises out of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
The facts of the complaint are to the effect that the complainant is an unemployed person. He applied for the post of distributorship to the O.Ps within their jurisdiction. There was condition between the complainant and O.Ps. The distributorship would allotted to the complainant subject to payment of Rs 2,00,000/- (Two Laks) as security money through bank draft to the company. It was agreed by both the parties that the said amount would be refunded to the complainant at the time of resignation would be surrendered from the aforesaid post before the O.Ps by the complainant. Then the complainant paid the security money amounting to Rs 2,00,000/- to the company (O.Ps) on dt. 28.06.2007 though bank draft issued by SBI Bhadrak Branch. The O.Ps came to the office of the complainant at Randia, Bhadrak and executed an agreement with the complainant on dt. 09.07.2007. The complainants opened their PCO farm distributors for the district of Bhadrak after execution of the said agreement and on receipt of the aforesaid security money. The complainant sensuously maintained the business work of the company till 2010. There was no negligence or over act caused by the complainants at any time towards the business of Airtel company. As per the direction and condition of the O.Ps, the complainants have performed their duty properly. The O.Ps are the service provider company. The complainants in respect of the service of O.Ps, made payment regularly to the O.Ps. The complainants have never defaulted to make any payment of O.Ps. Other mobile companies entered into the local companies and provided batter service to the people by which the said PCO units (coin collection box) of the complainants were not properly worked out in the market and was miserably deteriorated. The complainants were compelled to surrender the provided service equipments before the O.Ps and as a result of which the complainants resigned from their jobs and submitted all their documents before the O.Ps to refund their security money before the O.Ps.
The complainants submitted their representation before the O.Ps various times since the year 20010 to 2016 again and again, but the complainants were compelled to execute indemnity bonds and submitted them before the O.Ps. They prayed before the O.Ps to issue no claim certificate and other documents as well as their security money. But the O.Ps became heedless towards the complainant and carelessly avoided their representations. The complainants became aggrieved with the O.Ps because they were severely harassed and sustained mental agony as well as heavy financial loss. The complainant issued a legal notice against the upon the O.Ps to refund back his security money on 05.07.2016, but the O.Ps remained silent and neither send any reply nor refunded the security money, returned back the documents of the complainants. In view of the above facts and circumstances the complainants have been seriously harassed and persecuted when the O.Ps defied to refund back the security money and consecutively avoided the representations made by the complainants from 2010 to 2016. Consequently the complainants have been compelled to take shelter in this Forum.
The complainants have sought for the following reliefs;-
1. The O.Ps be directed to refund the security money amounting to Rs 2,00,000/- (Two Lakhs) only.
2. The O.Ps be awarded the cost and compensation for their deficiency of service, unnecessary harassment, as cost and compensation to be paid to the complainants which is amount to Rs 20,000/-.
3. The O.Ps be also directed to pay Rs 50,000/- towards interest.
4. They may be further directed to pay Rs 20,000/- as cost of the litigation.
Documents relied upon the complainants:-
1. Xerox copy of bank draft.
2. Legal notice.
3. Postal receipts.
The OP No. 1 & 2 appeared in this Forum through their concerned advocate where the OP No. 3 has been set ex-parte. The OP No. 1 & 2 have challenged the complaint with regards to the maintainability, limitation, mis-joinder of necessary parties, non-joinder of necessary parties as well as the limitation. They have admitted partly the Para-3 of the complaint and partly denied. They have denied the whole averments of the Para- 4 and 3. They have no comments with regard to the averments made in the Para- 6 & 7. They have also challenged the Para- 9 of the complaint and seeked to prove it. They have also denied the Para- 10, 11, 12 and 13. The averments made in the Para- 14 of the complaint also denied.
According to the OP No. 1 & 2 the complainants are not entitled to get their entire security. The complainants have not supplied the PAN number or the PAN Card of the O.Ps. In order to unable Bharti Airtel Ltd. to disburse the amount after adjustment with an intention to create the litigation against the O.Ps. At last the OP No. 1 & 2 have sought for the relief of dismissal of this complaint.
The OP No. 3 has been set ex-parte because of his non appearance and non filing of his relevant documents. The OP No. 1 & 2 have filed no document at all.
OBSERVATION
We have already perused the complaint and written version filed by the complainant and the O.Ps as well as the documents filed by the complainant. After scrutinizing the entire case record we have reached at the findings that non of the O.Ps has got his own office within the local jurisdiction of Bhadrak district. The OP No. 1 belongs to New Delhi, the OP No. 2 belongs to Bhubaneswar and the OP No. 3 belongs to Balasore. Both the complainants belongs to Bhadrak District. According to the settled principle of law the O.Ps must belongs to the local jurisdiction of District where the D.C.D.R.F is situated. We do not find any merit to adjudicate this case. This complaint is barred by local jurisdiction. Hence it is ordered;
- ORDER
The complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP No. 1 & 2 and ex-parte OP No. 3 without cost barred by the jurisdiction.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 30th May, 2019 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
