Date of filing     :    22.06.2018.

Decided on        :    30.09.2019.

JUDGEMENT

Bibekananda Pramanik, President – This consumer complaint under section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Sri Debashis Mondal against the O.P., named above, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.

          Complainant’s case, in brief, is as follows :-

          For travelling Bombay – Goa on 24.12.2017, the complainant paid Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- to the O.P. but the said tour was not conducted by the O.P. For the purpose of refund of money, the O.P. thereafter sent 2 (two) cheques of Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant but due to insufficient of fund those cheques were returned. Complainant thereafter sent a letter to the O.P. through his Advocate with a request to send fresh cheque but the O.P. did not give any reply. Hence the complaint, praying for directing the O.P. to refund the total amount of Rs. 45,000/- and for an order of compensation and cost.

          After receipt of notice, O.P. appeared in this case and prayed for time for filing W/V. Thereafter the O.P. did not appear for which the case was ordered to be heard exparte. Hence the exparte hearing.

POINT FOR DECISION

            Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs, as prayed for?

DECISION WITH REASONS

          To prove his case, the complainant has tendered his written examination-in-chief supported by affidavit in evidence and he has also filed copies of all relevant documents in support of his case.

          In his evidence, the complainant has fully corroborated his case of the petition of complaint and the documents filed by him also lend support to the case of the complainant. The evidence of the complainant and the documents filed by him go to show that he paid Rs. 45,000/- to the O.P. for a pleasant trip to Bombay – Goa but the said tour programme was not conducted by the O.P. It is also the evidence of the complainant that for refund of the advance money, the O.P. handed over 2 (two) cheques to the complainant but those were dishonoured due to insufficient fund. It is also the evidence of the complainant that in spite of demand notice, the O.P. did not pay the said amount to the complainant. Although the O.P. appeared in this case but he did not file any W/V thereby denying the said case of the complainant. So in view of the said evidence of the complainant and the documents filed by him, remaining unchallenged, we are constrained to hold that the complainant’s case is proved and he is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.

          Hence,

                      it is,

                               O R D E R E D

          that the Complaint Case No. 216/2018 is allowed exparte with cost against the O.P. O.P. is directed to refund Rs. 45,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till realization in full. O.P. is further directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 3,000/- as litigation cost.

          All such payment shall be made within 2 (two) months from this date of order i.d. the complainant will be at liberty to put this order in execution.

Let a plain copy of this order be given to the complainant free of cost.

Dictated and corrected by me. 

( Bibekananda Pramanik )                                                                                                    

President, D.C.D.R.F.,  Howrah.,