Subrata Debnath,

Prop. of S. B. Construction,

C/o – Late Dinesh Ch. Debnath,

P.O. – Bogram, Karnajora,

P.S. – Raiganj, District - Uttar Dinajpur. Complainant.



versus

S. L. Ghosh,

Manager / T.K.P. / C.O.,

Hindustan Cables Limited,

(A Government of India Undertaking),

9, Elgin Road, Kolkata – 700 020. Opposite Party.



Record is put up for delivery of order. The fact of this case in short is that the complainant, Subrata Debnath as proprietor of S. B. Construction secured a tender of Rs.9,05,464.00 from Hindustan Cables Limited (A Government of India Undertaking), 9, Elgin Road, Kolkata: 700020. As per contract of the work order, the complainant performed the work in full. But it is alleged that he has paid only Rs.7,40,114.00 by the O.P. after completion of the work. Though the O.P. assured that the remaining amount will be payable within one year after completion of entire work, still now no payment was made. Hence this complaint.



The complainant submits that he is entitled to be paid 1,72,038.00 only he breaks up his claim in the following manner –



1. Rs.90,546.00; which is 10% less of the approved amount.



2. Rs.66,492.00; which was realized as an amount of security deposit.



3. Rs.15,000.00; only.



Total 1,72,038.00 (rupees one lac seventy two thousand and thirty eight) only.



He further submits that an award of compensation of Rs.50,000.00 may be ordered for the loss in his business and litigation cost of Rs.10,000.00.



Decisions with reasons:



This is an ex-parte hearing of the complaint. The O.P., Hindustan Cables Limited has not contested the case but this Forum has received a copy of letter addressed to the complainant, which shows that the Company is in turmoil and has already been referred to B.I.F.R. As such no payment, if due, to the complainant can be made at the stage. This may be treated as W.V. of the O.P.



In support his case, the petitioner has given his evidence on affidavit and also filed the documents namely (a) work order, (b) payment certificate, (c) Payment Particulars and (d) TDS IT certificate. Now upon perusing the documents and the contents of his affidavit, we do find that the document No.1 is a Work Order of the Project granted to the complainant’s farm. Document No. 2 is a details of Income Tax deducted at source during 2006-07 of S.B. Construction. Document No. 3 is the Payment Certificate, which supports the payment of Rs.7,40,114.00 in favour of S. B. Construction after deduction on several heads. According to the case of the complainant he is entitled to get return after completion of the work, entire amount minus Income Tax deducted in advance before completion of the work. So, if we take all the facts and circumstances of the case of the complainant we do find that he has been able to make out a prima-facie case for getting an order in his favour. He has claimed that he is a businessman and due to non-payment of the amount due to him by the O.P.; he suffered in his business. This contention of the complainant can not be ruled out. If a huge amount is kept due for payment to a businessman, he does not only suffer, financially, but also mentally and thus finally became a victim of harassment. So, in our view complainant is also entitled to claim compensation.



In the result the complaint is allowed ex-parte with cost against the O.P., Hindustan Cables Limited.



Fees paid are correct.



Hence ordered,



That the complainant shall get an award of Rs.1,72,038.00 along with compensation of Rs.5,000.00 and litigation cost of Rs.200.00 against the O.P., Hindustan Cables Limited.



The O.P. is directed to pay total amount of Rs.1,77,238.00 (rupees one lac seventy seven thousand two hundred and thirty eight) only within three months from the date of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to claim the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the entire amount till the entire amount is satisfied.