ORDER

Mr. Rajes Guha Ray, Judicial Member

1. This case was filed in the year, 2017 but due to intervention of Covid-19 Pandemic, absence of full Bench and also huge workload etc. the disposal of the case has been delayed.

2. The complainant took loan of Rs. 9,25,000/- from the O.P. no. 1 for purchasing a chassis of a commercial vehicle minibus for public carrier for livelihood. The sanction letter and schedule payments details have not been handed over to her. The O.P. no. 2 is the builder of the vehicles’ body and the O.P. no. 1 introduced the body builder and pressurised the complainant to execute an agreement for building the body of the said vehicle at the garage of Srikrishna Maity, a partner of M/S Bhabani Body Builder. Said body builder showed his inefficiency to make the body within the stipulated period as per agreement and the complainant was compelled to complete the unfinished chassis at the garage of Suresh Sarins at Kolkata for which the complainant sustained loss for nearly 11 months.

The O.P. no. 1 also illegally debited her C.C A/C by Rs. 55,000/- & Rs. 10,000/- and paid it to Sri Suresh Sharma without complainant’s mandate. The complainant made several correspondences to the bank authority regarding corruption and mala fide act of the banker. By letter dated 18.01.2016 the bank authority of the Bidhannagar Branch assured the complainant that they are looking into the matter and the compensation (for delayed delivery) will be immediately credited to the complainant after correspondence with the body builder but nothing has been done as per letter of the bank. Finally by a letter dated 18.01.2017 the complainant demanded Rs. 45,00,000/- as a whole within a period on 1 month from the O.P. no. 1 causing negligence in rendering banking service as agreed and harassment with mental agony and pecuniary loss due to unfair trade practice. Lastly, by letter dated 13.02.2017 the bank refused to redress the grievance and against it the complainant gave reply etc.

Hence this case and the complainant has prayed for direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- as per mandate of the agreement, Rs. 25,00,000/- for causing loss of the business, harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs. 4,00,000/-

3. By filing written version the O.P. no. 2 namely Bhabani Body Builders contested the case challenging the complainant contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable under Consumer Protection Act, 1986; the subject matter of the instant case is a commercial vehicle (Mini Bus) for public carrier; It is stated that the complainant for her ulterior motive and strong dissatisfaction from the very beginning, did not co-operative with the O.P. no. 2 and by her own will chose another body builder of her near location. The O.P. no. 2 in due lawful process got opportunity to build the body of commercial Mini Bus Chassis as per estimate and common practice and standard of business. As soon as possible the O.P. started the work of assignment, but the complainant and her men, who regularly came to the workshop and started expressing their dissatisfaction upon the O.P. no. 2 since beginning as the O.P. was not within her local area and they created all sorts of problems and objections on each and every matter. Even they once made the O.P. bound to change the whole finished interior decoration of the body. Despite that the O.P. no. 2 almost finished his estimated work. The complainant herself restricted the O.P. to finish the estimated work and expressed in clear language that she was eager to finish the same by someone else at Garia, Kolkata and in furtherance of her desire she voluntarily took the chassis from the O.P. no. 2 in almost finished condition etc. The O.P. has prayed for dismissal of the case.

The case has been heard ex parte against the O.P. nos. 1 and 3.

4. The following points are framed for consideration in order to reach at a decision in this case.

P O I N T S F