State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
S Geetha Priya, Stamp Paper Vendor vs N Marimuthu, on 28 November, 2023
Daily Order IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI. Present: Hon'ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH : PRESIDENT F.A. No. 584 of 2023 (Against the order passed in C.C. No.226 of 2022 dated 08.03.2023 on the file of DCDRC, Tiruvannamalai). Tuesday, the 28th day of November 2023 S. Geethapriya Stamp Paper Vendor License No.18/2008/TVM (Ishwarya Jewellery Shop) Tindivanam Road Kilpennathur- 604 601. Tiruvannamalai District. .. Appellant / Opposite party Vs. N. Marimuthu S/o. Natarajan Pillayar Koil Street Old Colony, Kolathur Village & Post Kilpennathur Taluk Tiruvannamalai District. .. Respondent/ Complainant Counsel for the Appellant/Opposite party : M/s. Ayyadurai Counsel for the Respondent/ Complainant : M/s. K.Gangadharan (Undertaken) The Respondent as Complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite party praying for certain directions. The District Commission had passed an ex-parte order and allowed the complaint, in part. Against the said ex-parte order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Commission, Tiruvannamalai dated 08.03.2023 in C.C. No.226 of 2022. This appeal came before me for final hearing, today. Upon hearing the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, counsel for the respondent, perusing the documents, lower court records and the order passed by the District Commission, this Commission made the following order in the open court. ORDER
THIRU.R.SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT(Open court) The opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.
2. The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that the opposite party is a licensed stamp vendor selling the stamp papers in Ishwarya Jewellery Shop. On 03.11.2022 the complainant approached the opposite party for 2 Numbers of Twenty Rupees non-judicial stamp paper for his personal purpose. The opposite party demanded to pay Rs.30/- for each stamp paper of value Rs.20/-. When the complainant questioned about the same, the opposite party replied rudely and said if he is willing he can buy the stamp paper or otherwise he can leave the place. Hence, the complainant had purchased two stamp papers vide Sl.No.09AC 092922 and 09AC 092922 dated 03.11.2022 by paying the cost as demanded by the opposite party. The complainant made the payment through online, vide Transaction No.T2211031026309015108681. As per law, the opposite party is entitle to sell the stamp papers only on its actual value and submit the transaction data to the Government. The opposite party, concealing the excess amount collected from the consumers, is evading payments of tax for the proper income. Since there is an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, the complainant is entitle for compensation from the opposite party for the mental agony suffered by her. Hence, the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite party on 21.11.2022. But there is no response from the opposite party to the said legal notice. Hence, the complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission for a direction to the opposite party, to refund Rs.20/- to the complainant which is collected excessively for the stamp papers, to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as cost.
3. Though a vakalat was filed on behalf of the opposite party, no written version was filed on behalf of the opposite party within the stipulated time of 45 days and hence the opposite party was set ex-parte. Consequently, the District Commission passed an ex-parte order directing the opposite party to refund Rs.20/- towards the excess amount paid by the complainant towards the cost of Non Judicial Stamp Papers, to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as costs. Further, the District Commission has directed the opposite party to pay the said amount within two months from the date of the order failing which the award amount shall carry an interest of 6% p.a. from the date of the order till the date of realization.
4. Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party, praying to set aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits.
5. Before this Commission, the counsel for the appellant/opposite party submitted that the District Commission had failed to consider the fact that extending the time for the opposite party to file their written version would not cause any prejudice or hardship to the complainant. In the absence of quorum, the District Commission has not been vested with any powers to pass any orders much less than conduct the proceedings. Hence, the appellant prayed this Commission to set aside the order of the District Commission and to remit the matter back to District Commission to hear the complaint afresh, by affording her an opportunity to contest the case on merits.
6. When the case came up before this Commission on 23.11.2023, after hearing the submission of the appellant/opposite party, I am the opinion, irrespective the reasons assigned by the opposite party for non-filing of written version, in the interest of justice and in order to give a chance to the appellant/opposite party, to agitate their right on merits, this Commission is inclined to allow this appeal by remanding the matter to the District Commission, to dispose of the case on merit. However, considering the lethargic attitude of the opposite party in not appearing before the District Commission, this Commission imposed a cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission. The said cost was also paid today and since the condition imposed by this Commission has been complied with, the appeal is allowed and the complaint is remanded to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law.
In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tiruvannamalai in C.C. No.226 of 2022 dt.08.03.2023 and the matter is remanded to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tiruvannamalai for fresh disposal according to law and on merits.
Both parties are directed to appear before the District Consumer Commission, Tiruvannamalai on 28.12.2023 for further proceedings. The appellant/opposite party is directed to file Written Version, proof affidavit, written arguments and documents if any on the same day itself.
The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint on merits within three months after hearing both parties as expeditiously as possible as per law.
Both parties shall abide by the order of the District Commission regarding the mandatory deposit already made by the appellant/opposite party before this Commission.
R. SUBBIAH PRESIDENT Index : Yes/ No AVR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/November/2023