By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-
Brief of the complaint:- The complainant is the proprietor of M/s Ajamal Floor and Rice Mills, Chettapalam, Mananthavady. The representative of opposite party Mr. V. Subramanyam contacted the complainant at his institution at Mananthavady on 19.11.2011 and given a quotation for the purchase of ELLDER oil expeller and assured that the expeller will be delivered soon after 8 weeks of the full payment. The total amount claimed including VAT and CESS was Rs.1,32,131/-. On believing the representation and quotation, the complainant paid the amount to opposite party by way of Demand Draft drawn on 21.11.2011, 05.12.2011 and 22.12.2011 for a sum of Rs.45,000/-, Rs.44,000/- and Rs.43,131/- respectively through State Bank of Travancore, Mananthavady. The representative of the opposite party received the Demand Drafts and handed over the receipts issued by the opposite party dated 22.11.2011, 06.12.2011 and 24.12.2011. That means the complainant made full payment by 22.12.2011. The complainant paid the amount by expecting the soon delivery. The complainant made all arrangements to install the equipment by February 2012. But the equipment was not so far delivered by the opposite party. The act of the opposite party is caused irreparable loss , harm and hardship to the complainant. The complainant sent a Registered Notice through the lawyer on 28.11.2012 demanding him to deliver the equipment and to pay compensation. But the notice returned as unclaimed. This is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complainant prays to get a sum of Rs.1,32,131/- which he paid to the opposite party with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of payments and compensation Rs.50,000/- and cost of this litigation.
2. Notice sent to opposite party but Notice returned on 08.03.2013 stated that unclaimed. Hence opposite party is set ex-parte and proceeded with the case.
3. On considering the complaint and affidavit the following points are to be considered:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
4. Point No.1:- To prove complainant's case the complainant filed chief affidavit and examined as PW1. Exts.A1 to A10 were marked. Ext.A1 is the quotation dated 19.11.2011. Exts.A2 to Exts.A4 are the copies of Demand Drafts dated 21.11.2011, 05.12.2011 and 22.12.2011 for a sum of Rs.45,000/-, Rs.44,000/- and Rs.43,131/- respectively. Exts.A5 to Exts.A7 are the Payment Receipts issued by opposite party dated 22.11.2011, 06.12.2011 and 24.12.2011 for a sum of Rs.45,000/-, Rs.44,000/- and Rs.43,131/- respectively. Ext.A8 is the copy of Postal Receipt with Lawyer Notice. Ext.A9 is the unclaimed Notice. Ext.A10 is the brochure of ELLDER equipment.
5. On perusal of the affidavit and documents produced by the complainant it is clear that there is a deal between opposite party with complainant. The entire transaction took place at Mananthavady through one Mr. Subramanyam, the agent of the opposite party that is within the jurisdiction of this Forum. On 19.11.2011 the opposite party's agent made an assurance to the complainant that the Expeller will be delivered soon after 8 weeks of the full payments from the factory. The complainant issued 3 Demand Drafts to opposite party on 21.11.2011, 05.12.2011 and 22.12.2011 for a sum of Rs.45,000/-, Rs.44,000/- and Rs.43,131/- respectively through State Bank of Travancore, Mananthavady branch. The representative of the opposite party
received the Demand Draft and handed over the Receipts issued by the opposite party for the
same dated 22.11.2011, 06.12.2011 and 24.12.2011 that means the complainant made full payment by 22.12.2011. The Payment Receipts are the clear proof of acceptance of the amount by the opposite party. The complainant produced before this Forum clear proof of documents brochure of Expellers, Returned Lawyer Notice sent by the complainant to opposite party also produced by the complainant to substantiate his case. But opposite party not appeared before this Forum and filed his version. So believing the evidence adduced by the complainant and on perusal of documents produced by the complainant we assume that there is deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- The complainant proved all the points that he stated in the complaint with the help of affidavit and documents. So complainant is entitled to get a sum of
Rs.1,32,131/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the dates of payments and he is also entitled to get a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards cost and compensation. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,32,131/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Two Thousand One Hundred and Thirty One) only with interest @ 12% per annum from the dates of payments. The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) only as cost and compensation. This Order must be complied by the opposite party within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the 11th day of June 2013.
Date of Filing:23.01.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. T. Aboo. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Quotation. Dt:19.11.2012.
A2. Copy of Demand Draft. Dt:21.11.2011.
A3. Copy of Demand Draft. Dt:05.12.2011.
A4. Copy of Demand Draft. Dt:22.12.2011.
A5. Payment Receipt. Dt:22.11.2011.
A6. Payment Receipt. Dt:06.12.2011.
A7. Payment Receipt. Dt:24.12.2011.
A8. Copy of Lawyer Notice. Dt:28.11.2012.
A9. Unclaimed Notice.
A10. Brochure.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
