BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE
Dated this the 4th March 2017
PRESENT
SRI VISHWESHWARA BHAT D : HON’BLE PRESIDENT
SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI : HON’BLE MEMBER
ORDERS IN
C.C.No.393/2016
(Admitted on 09.12.2016)
Shravan, B.E. (Civil),
Ashraya, Sri. Nemigiri Road,
Hiriangady, Karkala 574104,
Udupi District.
…… Complainant
(Advocate for Complainant by Sri. BR)
VERSUS
The proprietor,
Mangalore Job Links,
Manpower Consultancy,
Shop No.04, 1st floor, Bharath Building,
P.M. Rao Road, hampankatta,
Mangalore 575001.
…. Opposite Party
(Opposite Party: Ex parte)
ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE MEMBER
SMT. LAVANYA M. RAI
- This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party claiming certain reliefs.
The brief facts of the case are as under:
The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.7,500/ with the Opposite Party on 28.4.2016 as security deposit at the time, Opposite Party offered to provide a job in ‘Marian Projects Mangalore and taken letter of undertaking from the complainant, in the event he secured job, he shall pay half month salary as service charges to the Opposite Party. The complainant did not secure job from the said firm, and he demanded the security deposit with the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party had promise to pay after 3 months. The complainant had visited several times and ultimately the Opposite Party had issued a post date cheque for Rs.5,000/ dated 15.11.2016 drawn on Axis Bank, Manglaore on 24.9.2016, encashed on 16.11.2016 and refused to pay the entire amount and retained Rs.2,500/. Thereafter the complainant got issued register notice on 7.10.2016 demanding the amount due from the Opposite Party but Opposite Party not replied nor refund the amount. Hence the above complaint filed under section 12 of the C.P.Act 1986(here in after referred to as the Act) seeking direction from this Fora to the Opposite Party to pay Rs.5,000/ towards the amount due along with damages suffered by the complainant with interest at 18% p.a from 28.4.2016 cost of this proceedings.
II. Version Notice served to the opposite party by RPAD, inspite of receiving notice the Opposite Party neither appeared nor contested the case. Hence we have proceeded Ex parte as against Opposite Party. Version of Opposite Party not filed hence treated nil.
III. In support of the complaint Shravan, (CW1) the complainant filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and produced the documents same has got marked as Ex C1 to C6. The Opposite Party placed Ex parte, hence Opposite Party not filed version nor led any evidence.
IV. In view of the above said facts, the points for arise for our consideration in the case are:
- Whether this Complainant proved that the Opposite Party committed deficiency in service?
- If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?
- What order?
We have considered the oral arguments submitted by the complainant and also considered the materials that was placed before the Fora and answered the points are as follows:
Point No. (i) : Negative
Point No. (ii) : does not arise
Point No. (iii): As per the final order.
REASONS
V. POINTS No. (i) to (iii): The complainant in order to substantiate the averments made in the complaint filed affidavit supported by the documents i.e. Ex.C1 to C6. From the documents it reveals that the complainant registered his name before Mangalore job links as per Ex.C1. The Opposite Party reffered to the complainant for interview as per Ex.C2, Ex.C3 is the declaration, Ex.C4 registered notice, Ex.C5 Acknowledgement, Ex.C6 xerox copy of the cheque issued in favour of the complainant for Rs.5,000/ by the Opposite Party.
Apart from the above we noted that there is no proof or single piece of documentary evidence to show that the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.7,500/ with Opposite Party on 28.4.2016. Whether the complainant had deposited Rs.7,500/, definitely placed the document before this fora. Hence there is no documentary evidence to prove that the complainant deposited amount of Rs.7,500/ with Opposite Party. Therefore the Opposite Party not committed deficiency in service, hence considering point no.1 is negative and discussing about point No.2 in this case is does not arise.
VI. In the result, accordingly we pass the following Order.
ORDER
The Complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost.
Copy of this order as per statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.
(Page No.1 to 5 directly dictated by Member to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 4th March 2017)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
(LAVANYA M RAI) (VISHWESHWARA BHAT D)
D.K. District Consumer Forum D.K. District Consumer Forum
Mangalore Mangalore
ANNEXURE
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:
CW1 Shravan,
Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.C1: 27.04.2016: Receipt (Notarised)
Ex.C2: 28.04.2016: Intimation letter from the Opposite Party (Notarised)
Ex.C3: 28.04.2016: Declaration from the complainant (Notarised)
Ex.C4: 07.10.2016: o/c letter issued by the complainant to the Opposite Party.
Ex.C5: 11.10.2016: Postal acknowledgement to the letter sent on 7.10.2016 to the Opposite Party.
Ex.C6: 15.11.2016: C/o Cheque bearing No.44597 of Axis Bank, Mangalore dated 15.11.2016 issued by the Opposite Party in favour of the complainant.
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:
Nil
Documents marked on behalf of the Opposite Party:
Nil
Dated: 4.3.2017 MEMBER
