West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

CC/10/293

Ranjit Das and 3 others - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director, Big Boss Restaurant and 2 others - Opp.Party(s)

29 Jun 2012

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Unit-I, Kolkata
http://confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/10/293
 
1. Ranjit Das and 3 others
13A, Mehar Laskar Lane, Kolkata-700017.
Kolkata
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Big Boss Restaurant and 2 others
54C, Mathes Wartala Road, Kolkata-700046.
Kolkata
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das PRESIDENT
  Smt. Sharmi Basu MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.

 

CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 293 / 2010 .

 

1)                   Sri Ranjit Das,

            13A, Mehar Lasker Lane, Kolkata-700017.

 

2)                   Sri Basab Shaw,

            122D, Manicktala Street, Kolkata-700006.

 

3)                   Wasim Ahmed,

            B/29/H/1, Lower Range, Kolkata/

 

4)         Md. Faisal,

            24B, Syed Amer Ali Avenue, Kolkata.                                                                ---------- Complainant

 

---Versus---

 

1)                   The Managing Director, Big Boss Restaurant,

54C, Mathes Wartala Road, Tangra, China Town, Kolkata-700046.                         ---------- Opposite Party

 

2)                   HRAET’s,

Everest House, 18th Floor, 46, Chowringee Road, Kolkata-700071.

 

3)                   Food Corporation of India,

            6, Ryed Street, Kolkata-700016.                                                              ---------- Proforma Opposite Party                                  

 

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member

                                        

Order No.   18    Dated  29/06/2012.

 

            The petition of complaint has been filed by complainants Sri Ramjit Das and others against the o.ps. Big Boss Restaurant and others. The case of the complainants in short is that complainants are friends and have visited the o.p. restaurant for entertainment and to celebrate an auspicious occasion among themselves being friends on 14.2.10 at about 3-00 p.m. and they ordered for lunch which were served after a lapse of forty minutes after rigorous knocking and enquiry about the delay which was highly disappointing and  utterly disgraceful n the part of the service of o.p. for which taxes and other impositions are being charged included in the meme rate card of o.p. After a mess of whole incident in the manner aforesaid when the food as ordered were served at last the same were cold, non palatable, not upto the mark and was highly disgraceful whereby complainants seeking no other alternative and being compelled and constrained to consume the food with uttermost reluctance in as much as the complainants without any further delay being dissatisfied with and aggrieved by the non service on the part of o.p. lodged a written complaint on a piece of paper and handed over to the security guard as the authority in charge of o.p. did not pay any heed nor did show any enthusiasm to forward the complaint book whereby throwing some lame excuse that o.p. does not have any  complaint book for the reasons not known to complainants. Thereafter complainants jointly issued a letter to o.p. describing the fate and fact of the incident on 14.2.10 and the said letter was sent to o.p. under regd. post with A/D and the said notice was received by o.p. by signing the said S/D card and the said incident was also brought into the notice of proforma o.ps. Hence, the case filed by complainants with the prayer contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.

            O.p. no.1 had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.p. no.1 in the course of argument submitted that the instant case has been filed just to harass the o.p. and further submitted that complainants ate the food and had it been not eatable they would not have eaten it. Matter was heard ex parte as against o.p. nos.2 and 3 as they did not contest the case by filing w/v.

Decision with reasons : -

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. From the annexure attached with the petition of complaint and on perusal of the materials on record we find that complaint book was not offered to the complainants despite several insistences and we do not find any reason to disbelieve the statement made by complainants and we find that o.p. no.1 had clear deficiency in service being a service provider to its consumer / complainant ad complainants are entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest against the o.p. no.1 with cost and ex parte against o.p. nos.2 and 3 without cost. O.p. no.1 is directed to pay to the complainants compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for their harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Smt. Sharmi Basu]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.