Orissa

Rayagada

CC/4/2017

Smt. Sivala Rajeswari - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director INSTA Communicattion - Opp.Party(s)

Self

27 Oct 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No.04 / 2017.                                               Date.   27     .     10  . 2018

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                       President.

Sri  GadadharaSahu,                                             Member.

Smt. Padmalaya  Mishra,                                     Member.

 

Smt. Sivala Rajeswari, W/O: Late  Sivala Appala Naidu, At: Kasturi  Nagar, Ist. lane,  Po/Dist:Rayagada,  765 001  (Odisha)                                    …. Complainant.

Versus.

1.The  Managing Director, INSTA Communication office, 201 to  209, 2^nd. Floor, Gupta Complex, 90 feet road,  Anna Nagar, Madurai- 625023, Tamilnadu.                          .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Self.

For the O.Ps:- Set exparte.

JUDGEMENT

The  curx of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for breach of contract agreement & non refund of  amount a sum of Rs.46,650/-  which was  deposited in the bank accounts  of the O.Ps   for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant. 

Upon  Notice, the O.Ps neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  18 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.Ps.  Observing lapses of around 2 years  for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  the  counsel for the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps. The action of the O.Ps is against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.Ps. set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

We therefore constrained to  proceed to dispose of the case, on its merit.  Heard from the complainant.   We perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the complainant.

                                                Findings.

Undisputedly  the complainant after going through  an Advertisement published  in the daily news paper ‘SAMBAD’ on Dt. 8.7.2016 intended to  installation of mobile  tower in the rural and urban areas and they had given their office address(copies of the same is in the file which is marked as Annexure-I.  According to  the  advertisement  the complainant had  contacted  the O.P. over the phone number provided by them  and they had supplied the forms  in turn the complainant had duly  filled up   the said forms  with copy of her land documents to be leased out to them. On getting the same the O.P. had  sent his site Engineer Mr. Ajay to verify  the location, feasibility for the  purpose and other legal matters and they   had  confirmed the deal vide their letter Dt. 20.7.2016( copies of the same is in the file which is marked as Annexure-2).  As per the requirement and terms of the advertisement  inter  alia  on the advise of the  O.Ps  the complainant had  deposited  money in the bank  accounts  of the  O.Ps  in different dates  i.e. Dt.15.7.2016  a sum of Rs.1,650/-, Dt.25.7.2016 Rs.16,500/-, Dt.01.08.2016 Rs.27,500/-, Dt.1.9.2016 Rs.1,000/-   total a sum of Rs. 46,650/- (copies of the bank acknowledgement is in the file which are marked as  Annexure-3 to 6).  Thereafter  the O.P. did not  contact to the  complainant   and there  is no communication  from any body nor return the  deposited amount a sum of Rs.46,650/-.  Hence this  C.C. complaint.

On perusal of the record this forum found that admittedly the complainant  had sent  a sum of Rs.46,650/-   to  the   O.Ps through bank  to  their account for   installation of mobile  tower after going through  an advertisement   published  in the daily news paper ‘SAMBAD’ on Dt. 8.7.2016. Again this forum found after receipt of the amount  from the  complainant the O.Ps have subsequently the  telephone numbers supplied by them became switch off  and there is no communication from the side of the O.Ps or his staff.  Further  it is observed  by such approach the O.Ps have induced so many persons in this area to deposit the amount in to their account only to  cheat the general public and to make  money  by such deposit practice.

In this connection this forum relied citation it is held and reported in C.P.R. 2009(2)  page  No. 210  the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi where in observed in para -9  which are mentioned here under.

Clause® of  Sub-Section (1) of Section-2 of the Act defines Unfair Trade Practice as under:

“Unfair Trade Practice”   means a trade practice which, for the  purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice including any of the following practice namely:

(1)The practice of making any statement, whether orally or in writing   or by visible representation which.

(i)falsely represents that the goods are of a particular standard, quality, quantity, grade, composition, style or model…….

Obviously, the O.P having made the false representation as noted above  was guilty of unfair trade  practice. It is  not in dispute that the O.P. had been approaching the people by giving advertisements and interviews published in news papers and magazines having wide circulation.  Hundreds  of persons like the complainant  having been allured by those advertisement/interviews may have contacted  and deposited amount under the belief that they were being     installed of mobile  tower in complainants plot. To curb such  a false representation and to ensure that the faith to people for installation of mobile tower in complainants   own plot  is not eroded,  appropriate directions need be passed under Section -14(1)(f)  of the Act and for payment of compensation by the O.Ps. The  complainant having spent money for installation of mobile tower inter alia  she having  undergone mental agony during  the period   for such unfair trade practice  implemented  by the O.P

There is serious lapse on the part of the O.Ps by the advertisement in the news paper with the intention to collect illegal money not only from the complainant but also  from the general public.  More over the O.Ps are avoiding to refund the  deposited amount.  It conclusively proves there  is deficiency in service on his part.

Hence to meet the ends of justice the following order is passed.

                                  ORDER.

In resultant the complaint petition stands allowed in part against the  O.Ps exparte.

The  O.Ps are directed to refund the deposited amount a sum of Rs.46,650/- with interest @ Rs. 9% per annum from the date of respective deposit till realization  inter alia to pay Rs.1,000/-  towards cost of litigation.

This forum  passed order against the O.P “Cease and Desist’   to forthwith  discontinue to represent either orally or by means of advertisements in newspapers or magazines or in any  that they inviting application from the persons who desirous to spare their land for the purpose of installation of mobile tower  in their land.

The order is to be complied by the O.Ps within   30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Service the copies of the order to the parties free of cost.

Dictated and corrected  by me.

 Pronounced in the open Forum today on this        27th. day  of , October., 2018 .

 

Member                               Member.                                                   President