Orissa

Baudh

CC/17/2015

Sadhu Charan Meher,S/O-Late Bansidhar Meher - Complainant(s)

Versus

junior Engineer,Lift Irrigitation L.i Section,Manamunda - Opp.Party(s)

LD Adv

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BOUDH
NEAR CIRCUIT HOUSE, BOUDH, 762014
 
Complaint Case No. CC/17/2015
( Date of Filing : 03 Mar 2015 )
 
1. Sadhu Charan Meher,S/O-Late Bansidhar Meher
At:Khairmal Po:Raxa Dist:Boudh
Boudh
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. junior Engineer,Lift Irrigitation L.i Section,Manamunda
At/Po:Manmunda Dist:Boudh
Boudh
Odisha
2. Asst.Engineer,Lift Irigition L.I section,Boudh
At/Po/Dist:Boudh
Boudh
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Padmanava Mahakul PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Suvendu Kumar Paikaray MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 21 Oct 2016
Final Order / Judgement
  1.   Alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice the complainant filed this case against the .Ps for a direction to dig bore well and pay compensation.
  2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he had applied for a bore well and after proper scrutinization he has been selected by the O.P to dig bore well .The O.P asked the complainant to deposit of Rs1,000/- as advance for re boring and  given a receipt  vide No  397785  dtd. 25.3.2013 .After receiving the same amount from the complainant  the O.P did not take any steps  even if approached by the complainant which forced him to file this case against the O.P.s
  3.  After being noticed, the O.P. appeared and filed their counter in this case. The case of the O.P. is that  the case is not maintainable and  further the  O.P admits  that the complainant has deposited Rs.1,000/- towards boring the well , but  it was not successful .They  stated that the complainant has not deposited further amount regarding the bore well  .Further they have submitted that the O.P.have sent a letter to the complainant on 23.5.2015  to deposit  Rs.19,000/- for digging the well. They have not done any deficiency of service and pray for dismissal of the case.
  4.   The complainant submitted documents like Xerox copy ROR, and also the receipt showing payment.
  5.   The point for determination in this case is whether the complainant is a consumer against the O.P. and whether the O.Ps caused any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice have caused to the complainant.
  6. The receipt filed by the complainant shows that they have taken Rs, 1,000/- for re boring of the bore well. The written submission filed by the O.P shows that when one boring was failed they have not taken any steps for re- boring which proves deficiency of service and unfair trade practice made by them.
  7. Taking into consideration of the case of the complainant and the O.Ps, we allow the case of the complainant and direct the O.Ps to take immediate steps for re boring of the bore well in another place in the land of the complainant within one month from the date of the order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to take steps against the O.Ps for carry out of the order.

 

Order pronounce din the open court under the seal and signature of the forum this the 21st day of October, 2016.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Padmanava Mahakul]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Suvendu Kumar Paikaray]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.