POOJA SALES PRIVATE LTD Vs. M S KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved against the order dated 30.7.91 passed in complaint Case No.536/91 by the District Forum, Jaipur the opposite party before the District Forum has filed this appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein "the Act" ). Though the facts have been given with considerable detail in the order appealed against, we consider it proper to notice only those facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal.

(2.) The complainant-respondent has alleged that it is an advertising agency carrying on the business in the name of Mount Advertising Pvt. Ltd. The complainant has taken a contract from the Municipal Council, Jaipur to put its hordings in the shape of advertisement at the bus shelter, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur for the year 1990-91. Similarly for the year 1991 another bus shelter towards the Secretariat for putting hordings, a contract with Mahavir Advertising Bureau, the work which was looked after by Shri Shripal Jain. The opposite party, Pooja Sales Pvt. Ltd. took it for one year @ Rs.1,100/- per month and an agreement (Exhibit 1) was executed between the parties. The material part of that will be dealt with herein under. Similarly the contract was given to the opposite party by Mahavir Advertising Bureau @ 1,100/- per month. The agreement in respect of which has been produced and marked Exhibit 2. The complainant sent bill No.206 dated 14.11.90 for 5 month's hire amounting to Rs.5,500/-. Similarly bill No.207 dated 18.11.90 bill for Rs.5,500/- was sent for payment. Both the bills have been submitted and marked as Exhibit 3, and Exhibit 4, and for excess painting opposite party submitted additional bill No.225 dated 25.3.91 for Rs.600/-. It was also sent. That has been produced as Exhibit 5. Against the outstanding amount of Rs.11,600/-, the opposite party merely paid Rs.6,600/- and Rs.5,000/- were outstanding. The complainant again sent bill No.226 dated 1.4.91 for 7 months of Rs.7,700/- for payment without delay which has been produced as Exhibit 6. Similarly Rs.7,700/- was out standing of Mahavir Advertising Bureau against the opposite party in respect of bill No.227 dated 1.4.91. According to the complainant a sum of Rs.27,000/- was outstanding against the opposite party out of which Rs.6,600/- were paid and a sum of Rs.20,400/- remained outstanding. The complainant produced the photographs of the advertisement marked as Exhibit 9. The opposite party did not pay the amounts of the bills and sent a reply dated 13.4.91. The complainant has, therefore, filed the complaint which has been signed by Shri Pal Jain and M. S. Khan for the award of Rs.20,400/- with interest and compensation. It may be stated that the complaint was filed by Mr. M. S. Khan. An unsworn affidavit was submitted with the complaint.

(3.) Notice was issued to the opposite party. It appears from the proceedings of the District Forum that the notice was not served on the opposite party and it was ordered that a fresh notice be issued about which intimation was given to the complainant. The complainant submitted that the service of the notice may be awaited and so it was awaited and the date fixed was 9.7.91. On 9.7.91 the absence of the opposite party was recorded. Ex-Parte arguments were heard and the complaint was posted for orders on 16.7.91 and the order under appeal was pronounced on 30.7.91. By the impugned order the District Forum accepted the complaint in part and ordered for the payment of Rs.20,400/- to the complainant within one month from the date of the order failing which the opposite party will be liable to pay interest @ 18% p. a. on the amount of Rs.20,400/-. Hence this appeal.