Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/26/2017

Ramjan Mohd - Complainant(s)

Versus

M S Best of Luck enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Pawan Saddi

17 Nov 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

Consumer Complaint  No.26 of 2017

                                                     Date of institution : 18.04.2017                                    

                                                    Date of decision    : 17.11.2017

 

Ramjan Mohd. son of Mohd. Sadiq, resident of W.No.3, Amloh, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

……..Complainant

Versus

1. M/s Best of Luck Enterprises, Post office Road, Opp. Corporation Bank, Near Maghi College, Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib, through its owner/incharge Niazi Khan.
2. Niazi Khan son of Mohd. Suleman, owner/incharge of M/s Best of Luck Enterprises, Post office Road, Opp. Corporation Bank, Near Maghi College, Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

Residential Address:-

Niazi Khan son of Mohd. Suleman, resident of village Sounti, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

…..Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.                             

  Quorum

Sh. Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President                                         

        Sh. Inder Jit, Member

 

Present :        Sh. V.K.Sharma, Adv.Cl. for the complainant.

                      Sh. Sanjeev Abrol, Adv.Cl. for the OPs.

ORDER

 

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

                      Complainant, Ramjan Mohd. son of Mohd. Sadiq, resident of W.No.3, Amloh, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib, has filed this complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) under the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.           The complainant became a member of scheme floated by the OPs in the year 2015. As per the said scheme, the complainant paid 12 installments of Rs.800/- each, since its inception, to the OPs in cash. As per the terms and condition No.13 of the said scheme, a member who failed to be a lucky winner of either monthly draw or final draw was to be paid Rs.12,000/- in cash.  At the end of said scheme, in February 2016, a group draw was held, but no token draw came to the complainant. The complainant was entitled for Rs.12,000/- in cash from the OPs as per the said term and condition of the scheme, but the OPs failed to make the said payment to the complainant till date, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. The complainant also served a legal notice on the OPs but all in vain. Hence, this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to pay Rs.12,000/- along with interest; Rs.12,000/- as compensation for pain and sufferings by the complainant and Rs.15,000/- as costs.
3. The complaint is contested by the OPs, who filed joint written reply. In reply to the complaint, the OPs raised certain preliminary objections, inter alia, that this complaint is not maintainable in its present form; the complainant has suppressed true and material facts from this Forum and the complainant himself violated the terms and conditions of the said scheme. As regards the facts of the case, the OPs stated that the complainant paid all the installments of the scheme and got 12^th prize i.e. Diwan Bed with Foam, as mentioned at registration No.449 of the entry register. But the complainant did not collect his prize despite the repeated requests.  The complainant demanded Rs.12,000/- in cash from the OPs in lieu of prize won by him. The OPs are ready to hand over the prize won by the complainant, which is lying with the OPs.  The complainant himself violated the terms and conditions of the said scheme. There is no deficiency and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. After denying the other averments made in the complaint, OPs prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence copy of legal notice Ex. C-1, postal receipts Ex. C-2 & C-3, payment receipts Ex. C-4 to C-15, copy of terms and conditions of the scheme Ex. C-16, his affidavit Ex. C-17 and closed the evidence. In rebuttal, the OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Niaji Khan, Ex. OP-1, true copies of terms and conditions Ex. OP-2, copy of entry register Ex. OP-3, copy of winning entry register Ex. OP-4, copy of prize photo Ex. OP-5 and closed the evidence.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the main controversy involved in the present case is that, complainant did not win any prize and as per the terms and conditions of the OPs, a person who does not win any prize, shall be entitled to Rs.12,000/-. He pleaded that it is established from the material placed on record that complainant did not win any monthly draw or final draw and thus complainant was entitled to Rs.12,000/- as per the clause 13 of the scheme(Ex.C-16).Learned counsel argued that it is established from the act and conduct of the OPs, that OPs had committed deficiency in service, hence complainant deserves to be compensated for the same.

6          On the other hand, Learned counsel for the OPs submitted that in case complainant would not have won the draw, he would have been entitled to Rs.12,000/- as per clause 13 of the scheme. He pleaded that complainant, after joining the scheme had got 12^th position and he was entitled to receive free Diwan Bed with foam under the scheme. Learned counsel argued that it is evident from entry register at Sr.No.499(Ex.OP-3) and prize winners entries(Ex.OP-4) that complainant had won Diwan Bed with foam. He also argued that till date OP is willing to honor the terms and conditions and provide Diwan Bed with foam to complainant.

7.         We have gone through the record thoroughly and heard the Learned counsel for the parties. It is an admitted case that under clause 13 of the terms and conditions of the scheme (Ex.C-16), a person who does not win any monthly draw or final draw shall be entitled to Rs.12,000/-whereas in the present case it is established from entry register at Sr.No.499(Ex.OP-3) and prize winners entries(Ex.OP-4) that complainant had won Diwan Bed with foam but he did not come forward to collect the same. The complainant has failed to place on record any cogent evidence in support of his pleadings.

8.         Accordingly, in view of aforesaid discussion, we find that OPs have not committed any deficiency in service. Since the OPs are ready and willing to provide Diwan Bed with form, won by complainant, thus we direct the complainant to collect his prize. The present complaint being devoid of any merits is hereby dismissed. Parties to bear the costs.    

9.                   The arguments on the complaint were heard on 10.11.2017 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced

Dated:-17.11.2017

(A.P.S.Rajput)    

  President

 

 

(Inder Jit)

Member