West Bengal

Bankura

CC/13/2022

Dibyendu Som - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director - Opp.Party(s)

12 Sep 2022

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Consumer  Complaint No. 13 / 2022

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT

 

Present

      1. Samiran Dutta                                                               Ld. President

2. Rina Mukherjee                                                             Ld. Member

3. Sudhakar Ghosh                                                             Ld. Member

Dibyendu Som,  S/O Sri Shyamalendu Som, Proprietor of Sarada Traders, At Nutanchati, Loharpara, P.O. & P.S. & District- Bankura, PIN- 722101 Mob. 9832290179       …....Complainant

                                                                                                                                          

                                                                                       V e r s u s

 

1.Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, 839, 3^rd Floor, ‘A’ Block N Damodaran Road, Sahakar Nagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka, PIN-  560092    …….. Opposite Party                                                                                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 2.Girish KB, CRM Head Quarter, Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd, Shed No.44, DITP Ltd., SW-51, Appareal Park, Phase-II, KIADB Industrial Area, Doddaballapur, Karnataka,PIN-561203

                                                                                                                                      ……………..Opposite Party                                                            

3.Astik Bhattachariya, Regional Sales Manager, Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., 839, 3^rd Floor,‘A’ Block N Damodaran Road, Sahakar Nagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka, PIN-  560092                                   

……………..Opposite Party

4.Tarun Das, Area Sales Manager, Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., 839, 3^rd Floor,‘A’ Block N Damodaran Road, Sahakar Nagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka, PIN-  560092                                   

……………..Opposite Party

5.Joydeb Roidas, Sales Officer, Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., Resident of Lalbazar, Bankura, PIN-  722101                                                                               ……………..Principal-Opposite Parties                                  

                                                                                                              

6.Narasimha Murthy, Logistic Manager, Pristine Organics Pvt. Ltd., 839, 3^rd Floor,‘A’ Block N Damodaran Road, Sahakar Nagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka, PIN-  560092                                                                                                                

……………..Pro-forma Opposite Parties

                                                                                                                                                       Contd…..p/2

Page: (2)

 

Order No.05

Dated: 12-09-2022

The complainant is present by filing hazira.

Written Argument along with a series of documents as per firisti has been filed by the complainant.

The case is fixed for Ex-Parte hearing.

No step is taken by any of the O.P. who are found absent on repeated call.

So the case is finally taken up for Ex-Parte hearing today.

Perused the complaint and all the supporting documents including written argument. Heard the complainant.

The complainant’s case is that he being the super stockist under O.P.1 paid Rs.3 Lacs on account on     20-07-2021 by issuing A/c Payee Cheque in favour of O.P. No.1 against purchase of Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) and after getting the cheque O.P. No.1 supplied FMCG to the tune of Rs.2,44,997/-.  As they could not arrange any distributor for sale of those goods the complainant after waiting for about 2/3 months sold some of the FMCG amounting to Rs.25,832/-.The complainant has not received FMCG amounting to Rs.55,003/- out of payment of Rs.3 Lac.

Thereafter the complainant tried to push those unsold goods in the market but several complaints were received from the customers that those goods were defective and unusable and the complainant intimated the matter to the O.P./Company by email message but they did not take any step to replace those goods. Ultimately those unsold goods are lying in the stock of the complainant for a long time resulting  in complete damage of those goods beyond consumption as the goods are perishable and subject to natural decay.

Thus the complainant is entitled to get the refund of Rs.2,74,168/- as follows: -

1. Total amount paid  ……     …..    …….     Rs.3,00,000/-
2. Amount received for sold goods …….   Rs.   25,832/-

Total Amount Claimed………..…Rs.2,74,168/-

 

Be it noted that Total claim of Rs.2,74,168/- includes amount of damaged goods/unsold goodsof Rs.2,19,165/- plus amount of unsupplied goods Rs.55,003/-

                                                                                                                                                                           Cont…….p/3

Page: (3)

In support of all the break up claim amount the complainant has produced cogent and sufficient documents. Further the Commission finds sufficient material from email message on record that O.P. No.1 has virtually admitted the claim of the complainant for damaged/unused goods with due assurance of replacement of the damaged goods but the O.P./Company failed to do so. Email Message dated: 15-02-2021 sent on behalf of O.P.No.1 to the Complainant which reads as: “….. now only HO have to pick up your stocks and repay you…..” bears out the case of the complainant.

 

The complainant has successfully established the prima facie case to get the relief as prayed for. O.P. No.2 to 6 are officers and employees of O.P. No.1 and they have no direct personal involvement in the case as they have acted at the behest and on behalf of O.P. No.1. So O.P. No.1/Company is solely responsible and liable to the complainant for redressal of reliefs prayed for by the complainant.

 

Thus the case succeeds Ex-Parte.

 

Hence it is ordered

 

That the case be and the same is allowed Ex-Parte against O.P. No.1 and dismissed against other O.P.s.

The O.P. No.1 is directed to pay to the complainant Rs.2,74,168/- along with compensation of Rs.30,000/- within one month from this date failing which the complainant is at liberty to recover the decretal amount through Execution process. The O.P. No.1 is directed to take back all the damaged/unsold FMCG in the stock of the complainant on payment of the decretal amount. In default the complainant is given option to destroy those damaged or unsold FMCG after giving notice to the O.P. No.1.

 

Issue copy of Judgement to the complainant and O.P. No.1 free of cost. The complainant is directed to communicate the judgement to the O.P. No.1 for his information and taking necessary compliance.

                         __________________                                  ________________                       ________________

                    HON’BLE   PRESIDENT                           HON’BLE    MEMBER              HON’BLE    MEMBER