DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. No. 25/2020
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
26.02.2020 03.03.2020 16.01.2023
Complainant/s:- | Jagadish Halder, S/o. Ananta Kumar Halder, 18, Matangini Sarani, P.O. Italgacha, Kolkata-700079, P.S. Dum Dum, Presently at Finance & Account Department of ONGC Ltd, IOGPT building, Phase-II, Dist-Raigad, Panvel, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, Pin-410221, P.S. Panvel. -Vs- |
Opposite Party/s:- | 1.The Proprietor, Sikder Timber, 72, Tarun Sengupta Sarani, P.O. Italgacha, Dum Dum, Kolkata-700079, P.S. Dum Dum. 2. The Proprietor, Dimapur Timber, Lalit Gupta Street(Nimta), Majherhat (Roy Para), Near 237 No. Bus Stop, Dist- North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700049, P.S. Nimta. |
P R E S E N :- Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.
:- Sri Abhijit Basu……………………….Member
JUDGMENT / FINAL ORDER
This case is filed by the complainant U/S. 12 of C.P. Act 1986 as amended upto date.
The brief facts of the case is as under-
The complainant is an employee of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd(ONGC) and O.P. No.1 is Manufacturer of all kind of wooden furniture and steel Almirah and General Order Supplies and O.P. No.2 is general order suppliers of plywood timber Marchants. ONGC issued one order (45/2009) being Memo No. ONGC/ER/CP/WEL/FHGP//01 for get some facility for purchase the furniture and household goods to use at his residential purpose. As per clause 2.4 of the said order of ONGC, the complainant was permitted an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as a cost celling for purchase the furniture and house-hold goods at level-4 which is annexed as annexure –A. The ONGC issued a list for the complainant for item list of furniture and household goods for use as residence being CPF No.00094402 which also annexed as –‘coutd-A’. on the basis and terms and conditions of said office order of ONGC complainant placed an order of making dining table, Bookself and Almira for use at his residential purpose before the O.P. No.1on 03.08.2017 and the amounting Rs. 1,39,500/-.There is a internal relation with O.P. No.1and O.P.No.2. As O.P. No.1 is manufacturer and O.P..No.2 is general order supplier. The O.P.No.1 issued estimation bill in the name of ‘A/C ONGC- Jagadish Halder 94402 and O.P. No.2 also issued a Tax Invoice bill in the name of ONGC Jagadish Halder-94402 dated 03.08.2017. The complainant paid Rs. 1,00,000/-before the O.P. No.2 as per direction O.P. No.1 on the basis of Tax Invoice No.1/17-18-03.08.2017 for supplying the 90CFT of Teak Swal timber to O.P.No.1 on 24.08.2017. It is mentioned that on disbursement of advance, the employee could purchase the specified items and submit adjustment along with cash memo and other documents as loan and advance within 45 days from the date of receipt of advance failing which penalty @ 18% per annum on the amount drawn, shall be charged. The condition of the order was to deliver the articles within 45 days. The opposite parties assured to supply within 45 days as such they issued the receipt as ‘ONGC-Jagadish Halder 94402’. But the O.Ps failed to deliver the said furniture. The complainant taken a loan from
6ontd/-2
C. C. No. 25/2020
:: 2 ::
ONGC for purchase necessary furniture accordingly the complainant paid Rs. 1,00,000/- on 24.08.2018 and 28.08.2018 as an advance for procurement of furniture as per tax invoice No.1/17-18 dated 03.08.2017. The complainant expressed his terms and conditions of the said office loan before the O.Ps and after satisfaction the O.Ps agreed to deliver the furniture within 45 days but failed to supply the articles. Compelling circumstances the complainant purchased articles from other shop. The complainant requested several times return the advance booking money of Rs. 1,00,000/- but in vain. Hence the complainant filed this case.
After filing the case and after serving notices upon the O.P. Nos. 1 and 2, the O.P.No.1 received the notice but did not urge to appear before this commission hence the case runs exparte against O.P.No.1 and after receiving notice, O.P.No.2 filed vokalatnama but did not file W/V and as the statutory period was over the case run exparte against O.P.No.2.
Issue framed for judgment
1.Whether the case is maintainable or not?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief or reliefs before this Commission or not?
Reasons for judgment
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and character of the case all the points are interlinked to each other and as such all points are taken up together for consideration.
On perusal of the material record and complaint supported with affidavit filed by the complainant. It is revealed that the complainant paid Rs. 1,00,000/- for purchase furnitures by taking loan from ONGC as per terms mentioned in the office order No.45/2009 being Memo No. ONGC/ER/CP/WEL/FHGPS/01 dated 17th August 2009 as level E-4 & E-3 being clause 2.4 ired by the authority. The condition of loan as per clause 2.4(VI) of the order of ONGC that on disbursement of advance, the employee shall purchase the specified items and will submit adjustment along with cash memo and other documents as loan and advance within 45 days from the date of receipt of advance, failing which penalty @ 18% per annum of the amount drawn, shall be charged. The complainant taken a loan from ONGC on the basis of the said condition. Complainant paid Rs. 1,00,000/-to O.P. No.2 as advance for procurement of furniture like bed, dining set, Bookself as per tax invoice No-1/17-18, dated 03.08.2017.The O.P issued the said receipts with full knowledge regarding the condition of ONGC at 2.4. as such the O.Ps issued receipts in the name of ‘ONGC-Jagadish Halder-94402’ dated 03.08.2017 and ‘A/C ONGC-Jagadish Halder 94402. As the O.P issued the receipts as A/C-ONGC-Jagadish Halder -94402 it is evident that the O.Ps are well conversant with the conditions that they have to deliver the ordered articles within 45 days. After receiving the advanced money the O.Ps were failed to deliver the articles and / or furniture which was ordered by the complainant. After elapse of 45 days from the date of booking i.e. on 28.08.2018 the O.Ps failed to deliver the ordered furniture with respective bills and as per terms and condition of the loan amount, the office has been charged @ 18% p.a. for penal interest. Complainant went to the O.Ps on several times but in vain. Compelling circumstances complainant purchased furniture from other shop with high price to avoid further penal interest charged. The complainant verbally requested the O.Ps on several occasions for refund the advanced amount but in vain. Ultimately onn 21.12.2018 after elapse of 4 months the complainant sent legal notice upon O.P. No.2 for return the money with 18% interest. On 26.12.2018 the O.P replied through Advocate. It is admitted that Rs. 1,00,000/-was received on 24.08.2017 and 28.08.2017 by two R.T.G.S and informed that furniture are ready to deliver. Complainant replied in regard. It is evident that the O.P received Rs. 1,00,000/- and did not deliver ordered articles and furniture within 45 days. As per instruction of O.P. No.1 payment was made to O.P. No.2. Hence both are liable for non-deliver the furniture and articles of goods within 45 days as ordered by the complainant and due to deficiency of service by the O.Ps the complainant was compelled to purchase furniture from other shop and penalty was imposed upon him for non-compliance the conditions of ONGC Loan. Hence the complainant is the consumer of the O.Ps and it is the duty of the O.Ps to provide service as per their contract but the O.P did not provide service within time which will be treated as deficiency of service by O.P.
Contd/-3
C. C. No. 25/2020
:: 3 ::
Hence O.Ps are liable to return the advance amount of 1,00,000/- within two months with interest as paid by the complainant to ONGC. The case is within the pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction of this commission, hence the commission has ample power to try this case.
Hence,
it is ordered
that the case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.Ps.
The opposite parties are directed to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- jointly and severally along with interest paid by the complainant with 6% interest p.a from the date of delivery of the articles till realization within two months from the date of judgment and shall pay Rs. 5,000/- for litigation cost and mental agony and harassment within two months from the date of judgment. Failing which the complainant has liberty to file execution case as per law.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.
Dictated & Corrected by
Member
Member Member
