PRESENT

                   Complainant by Adv. Shri.Wankhede present.

                   Opponent by Adv. Shri. Lalit Jain present.                  

ORDER

(Per Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President.

1.                The brief facts  of the complaint may be stated as under

1)      The complainant is organization dealing with social activities  and opponent is a company carrying on business of providing mass email campaign services through web and internet by mail blasting.

2)      The agreement between the complainant was entered for the purpose of spread message through email campaign on payment of Rs. 1,50,000/-The amount was paid by complainant to opponent on 3.2.2010.

3)      The said amount was paid as per agreement of rendering service of spreading 80 crores messages through call Ezee which is the site of opposite party.

4)      The opposite party has not rendered the service as per the terms of agreement.  It is alleged that opp. is avoiding to abide by agreement and claiming further amount and again taken Rs.11,030/- from complainant.

5)      The opponent was expected to complete work on  or before 10.2.2010, however there was no any progress in the work.  There was no response for the legal notice.

6)      The complainant claimed refund of amount, plus compensation as well as cost from opposite party.

2.                The opposite party filed written version and denied the truth and correctness of all allegations made by complainant.  It is alleged that complainant is not a consumer and is not entitle to institute legal proceeding.

3.                The opposite party stated that complaint is governed by Arbitration Act and both parties  have chosen the jurisdiction at courts  in Chenai.   It is stated that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice as alleged.

4.                The opponent stated specifically that figures for email blasting to the tune of 80 crores as an object of contract was not performable and is a typical case of mistake of fact.  This has admittedly been brought to the notice of complainant personally or through mail. 

5.                The opponent submitted in para 6 of W.S. that   it was brought to the notice of complainant that official of opposite party who was responsible for mistake was removed from service.  It is prayed that complaint be dismissed. 

6.                We have heard both sides and perused the documents. The receipts of payment issued by opposite party dated 5.2.2010 for Rs.1,12,500/- and receipt dated 6.2.2010 for Rs. 37,500/- show that complainant paid  amount to opponent.   The receipt dated 30.6.2010 for Rs.11,030/- indicate complainant paid for charges towards registration for email- campaign.

7.                The opposite party admitted in written statement as well as written argument that employee who was dealing with the said work failed to do work and was removed from service of opponent.

8.                On careful perusal of documents, it is evident and also admitted by opponent that opponent failed to render service as per agreement even after accepting Rs.1,61,030/-.  The complainant stated that object of contract was to save mother earth and not for commercial purpose.

9.                The opponent was under an obligation to perform contractual obligation, however there was breach  of contract to render service on the unustified ground, of conduct of employee.

10.              The opponent was also entitle to request complainant regarding inability to perform the contract for any justifiable reasons.  The opponent instead of complying the terms of contract  did not bother even to reply the legal notice issued by complainant.

11.              As there is no evidence regarding even part compliance it would be in the interest of justice, to direct opponent to refund the amount  taken for performance of service .

12.              The complainant is entitle to receive the amount with interest.  As we are awarding interest, we do not award compensation separately.  The complainant is entitle for cost.

13.              In the result, we pass the following order. 

                                            ORDER

1.       RBT   complaint No. 6/2012 is partly allowed. 

2.       The opposite party INFO NETWORK MANAGEMENT CO. Pvt. Ltd. is directed   to pay Rs.1,61,030/- (Rupees one lakh sixty one thousand and thirty) with interest @ 18 % p.a. to complainant from the date of admission of complaint i.e. 12.1.2012 till payment.

3.       No separate amount of compensation is made as rate of interest is awarded at 18 % p.a.

4.       The opponent is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to complainant as cost of complaint.     

5.       Copy of this order be sent to both parties.