DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24-PARGANAS, JUDGES’ COURT,
ALIPORE, KOLKATA-700 027
>> C.C. CASE NO.: 73 OF 2009 <<
DATE OF FILING: 18.3.2009
DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 31.07.2009
_ ____.____._____.____._____._____._____.____.______._____._____.____.______.___ _
c >|< c >|< c >< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c
l
Present : President : Dipak Shyam Roy
Member(s) : Amitabha Roy Chowdhury & Sharmi Basu
________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINANT : Tapan Kumar Mukherjee,s/o late B.K. Mukherjee
740 A/1, Block-“P” New Alipore,Kolkata – 53.
- >> : versus : << -
O. P. / O. PS : 1. Anand Kr. Gupta , 42, Swinhoe Lane,
Kasba,(Talbagan), Kolkata – 42, P.S. Kasba.
________________________________________________________________________
>> J U D G E M E N T <<
________________________________________________________________________
The complainant Sri Tapan Kr. Mukherjee of 740ª/1, Block –“P” New Alipore ,Kol-53 filed this complaint under section 12 of the C.P Act alleging deficiency in service by the O.P.
The complainant had engaged the O.P for certain works in his house for which the O.P gave a quotation of Rs. 183998/- and the work was to be completed within one month. Thereafter the O.P took money from the complainant in account payee cheque and in cash total amount paid being Rs. 54300/- at different times during 20.11.2008 to 19.1.2009. But the O.P did not complete the work for which he received Rs. 54300/- . The complainant had requested the O.P to complete the work or refund Rs. 54300/- by a letter dt. 11.2.2009. But the O.P did not respond. Hence this complaint.
The complainant prayed to this Forum for refund of the amount of Rs. 54300/- together with compensation and costs. The O.P/Ananda Kr. Gupta had received the notice of this Forum but did not appear before this Forum to contest the case. Hence the case was heard exparte against the O.P. The complainant filed his evidence on affidavit.
Decision of the Forum :
We have examined the documents filed by the complainant and also heard arguments preferred by him. The complainant has produced receipts of the amount of Rs. 54300/- paid by him to the O.P supported by statements of his bank account. The O.P not appearing , the documents went unchallenged. Hence we accept the contention of the complainant that Rs. 54300/- had been paid by him to the O.P within the period 20.11.2008 to 19.1.2009, but the work assigned to the O.P was not completed and the work was finally stopped after 19.1.2009. Moreover materials like marble, tiles for which payment was already received by O.P were not at all brought to the site. Hence there is deficiency in service of the O.P. The complaint is therefore to be allowed with compensation and costs. But we think the compensation amount and cost of litigation as claimed by the complainant are too much on the higher side. We should allow only reasonable amounts on these counts.
Hence Ordered
That the complaint under Section 12 of the C.P Act is allowed with costs, exparte against the O.P. The O.P is directed to pay Rs. 54300.00 to the complainant with interest @10% p.a w.e.f 19.1.2009. The O.P will further pay Rs. 5000.00 as compensation for causing harassment and 1000.00 as cost of litigation to the complainant. All sums are payable within 30 days from the date of order.
Let a copy of this order be served upon the parties free of cost.
Member Member President
Dictated and corrected by me
Member
Tags: Anand Kr. Gupta