District :
South 24 Parganas.
Before the Hon’ble District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas.
CC
/ 142 / 2017
In
the matter of :
Shri
Rana Ghosh __________Petitioners
-
Versus –
-
Smt.
Nibedita Halder (Ghosh) and others.
__________Opposite Parties
WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES 1 & 2,
SMT. NIBEDITE HALDER (GHOSH) AND SMT. MANISHA HALDER.
The
humble petition on behalf of the opposite parties no.
1 & 2, above named, most respectfully;
Sheweth as under :
1.
That the Petitioner has been served
with the purported copy of petition, made by the Complainant. The Petitioner
have gone through the contents of the purported petition and made replies to
the same, are as follows.
2.
That Since the petitioner has not been
served with any copy of annexures, with the purported copy of petition under
Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, these opposite parties are not
able to put any comments, so far on the alleged annexures of the complainant,
and therefore the opposite parties seeks to get a copy of all those annexures
as to put their comments, for the purpose of proper adjudication, in the
interest of administration of justice.
3.
That these Opposite Parties will place
appropriate application, separately to get a copy of annexures, which has been
place by the complainant in his petition of complaint.
4.
That in absence of any copy of such
annexures being the documents and or papers relied on by the complainant, these
opposite parties are not able to put any comments so far, on those documents
and or papers, and therefore seeks to get such documents and or papers, a copy
thereof from the complainant, herein at the earliest, and thus the opposite
parties reserve their right to put comments on those documents and or papers,
by way of submitting Additional Written Version, in the present consumer
proceeding, before the Hon’ble Forum, in the interest of administration of
justice.
5.
That the Complaint is not maintainable
in its present form, either in term of the facts or in term of the Law.
6.
That the Complaint has not been made
out in terms of the provisions of Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act’
1986, and therefore not maintainable in its present form, and thus liable to be
dismissed with exemplary costs, in the interest of administration of justice.
7.
That the Petition is speculative,
harassing, motivated and barred by the Principles of Law and hence it is liable
to be rejected at once, in terms of assailing administration of justice.
8.
That the petition is suffering from
misjoinder and non joinder of necessary party in the proceeding, and therefore
liable to be dismissed at once with exemplary costs.
9.
That the subjected firm namely “The
Aspirant”, has not been made out any party in the present consumer proceeding
in the terms of the provisions of Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act’
1986, and thus for such non joinder of necessary party, the present consumer
proceeding is liable to be dismissed at once with exemplary costs, in the
interest of administration of justice.
10.
That the petition is suffering from
suppression of material facts and necessary party, and therefore liable to be
dismissed at once with exemplary costs.
11.
That the petition is suffering from
any legal demand and thereby cause of action, the present petition is motivated
and without any jurisdiction.
12.
That there is no cause of action has
ever been ascertained to place this present consumer proceeding, before the
Hon’ble forum, and therefore liable to be dismissed at once with exemplary
costs.
13.
That the Opposite Parties do not admit
all the allegations made in the application of the Petitioner / Complainant, to
be true and save and except those that are specifically admitted he put the
Petitioner, to the strict proof of the rest.
14.
That the contents of the Complaints
are vague and based on after thought concocted story, made out by the
Complainant to in-clinch issues in his favour, and thus no part of the contents
of the Complaint has ever been admitted by the Opposite Party, except those are
the matter of records.
15.
That the Opposite Party states that
the present Complaint has been instituted by the Complainant against the
Opposite Party to cause several hassle and harassments to the Opposite Party.
16.
That the Opposite Party states and
submits that the Complainant’s disputes, is not a Consumer dispute and the
Complainant is not a consumer, as defined and enumerated in the relevant
provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986.
17.
That before dealing with the statements
made in the petition under objection para wise, this Opposite Parties state the
following facts for Your Honour’s kind perusal :
a)
That the opposite parties 1 & 2, are
the partners of the partnership firm namely “The Aspirant”, being an Institute for
the preparation of competitive examination, having its Head Office at Sonarpur,
Sahebpara, Kolkata- 700150, District South 24 Parganas, and Branch Office at
Ballygunge, 75, B.B. Chatterjee Road, Kasba, Kolkata-700042, District South 24
Parganas, carrying out its activities of offering educational preparation of
competitive examination related to the State Government as well as the Union of
India.
b)
That the Opposite party no. 3, Mr.
Chandan Halder is not a partner of the said partnership firm namely “The
Aspirant” as well as he is not employed in the said partnership firm. Therefore
the opposite party no. 3, is an stranger person and no way related to the
activity of the said partnership firm.
c)
That in the present application under
section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the said partnership firm is
not a party and the opposite party no. 1 & 2 are individually carry no
responsibility so far.
d)
That the partnership firm release the broucher
with its course fees structure, rules and regulations and admission form which
clearly indicate as course name, course duration, course fees, regarding IAS
courses, course duration is one year and total course fees as of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand) only and for optional papers Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) only and the payment mode is one time, no installment facility has
ever been given, however in other courses installment facility has been
provided.
e)
That the complainant visited for
pursuing courses in IAS competitive examination and obtained broucher which contained
admission form. The complainant requested,
as well as placed his inability to make onetime payment as of Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only and Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) only for optional papers and asked that at the first he can make the
payment as of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only and thereafter he can
make the balance payment and in that event the opposite party suggest that on
completion of total payment only by the complainant, he may be able to join the
classes, since installment facility has not ever been ascertained for the
classes of IAS competitive examination.
f)
That the complainant on 9th July, 2017
paid as of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only and thereafter on 6th
August, 2017 paid Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only.
g)
That it is pertinent to states that on
good faith the opposite parties provide the classes of IAS competitive
examination to the complainant starting on and from 15/07/2017 in view to accommodate
financial stringencies of the complainant and whereas the complainant continued
his classes till 03/09/2017 and thereafter the complainant discontinue his
classes without assigning any reason so far. The complainant did never
communicate and or assign any reason of his absence from classes. However in
the month of October, 2017, one letter has been received by the opposite
parties through post, which contains the letter dated 28/10/2017, wherein the
complainant admitted the fact about course name, course duration, course fees
regarding the classes for the preparation of
the IAS competitive examination and consequently admitted the facts of
his payments and thereafter put the allegation about the manner of classes,
which is his concocted, after thought story as to discontinue his classes two
folded aspects, at the first since he is a Government employee, he is not able
to accommodate himself for the classes and timing thereof and at the second, he
is not able to make the payment and whereas in taking good faith, the complainant
without making total payment and submitting the admission form with the
requisite documents and photographs pursuing the classes since 15th July, 2017 to
till 3rd September, 2017.
h)
That the opposite party's Institution
being the well versed educational Institution for the preparation of
competitive examination provide to the complainant in good faith at the first,
the accommodation of payment of fees on request of the complainant, and at the
second the classes without obtaining total payment of fees and also without
obtaining admission form, so far.
i)
That the opposite parties given their
best to the complainant at the stake of morality since the education cannot
equate with any commercial activities, it is preponderance parlance as of being
a social activity which input into intellectual property of the society and the
country. The opposite parties provide their best in view to assist the
complainant herein, so that he may enrich his dream to become as IAS officer of
this Country.
j)
That the present complaint has been
made before the Hon’ble Forum, motivated and with a intention for the wrongful
gain and acquire of wrongful claim thereby the complainants herein.
k)
That the Opposite Party, herein did
not cause any deficiency in services, and or unfair trade practices, in terms
of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, and rules made thereof.
l)
That all the activities of the
opposite parties are acceptable in terms of the facts as well as in terms of
the law.
m) That
the complainant is not a consumer in terms of the provision of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986, and the disputes put forward by the complainant is not
the consumer disputes in terms of the provision of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986.
n)
That the complainant is not entitled
to get any relief as prayed in the complaint, and the same is liable to be
dismissed with exemplary cost thereof.
o)
That in the facts and in the laws, it
is totally evident from the application itself that the complainant made his endeavor
to put the Hon'ble Forum into motion to get his wrongful gains.
p)
That in the facts and in the laws, it
is totally evident from the application itself that the complainant is trying
to miss utilize the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Forum.
q)
That since the story of the
complainant is vague and frivolous one, the same is liable to be dismissed with
exemplary cost.
18.
That without waiving any of the
aforesaid Objections and Facts and fully relying thereupon and without
prejudice to the same. The Opposite Party, now deals with the specific
paragraphs of the said Application in seriatim as hereunder.
- That
the Application is not maintainable either in facts or in its present form
and the petitioner has no cause of action for bringing this suit against
the Opposite Party as the said application is speculative, harassing,
motivated, concocted and baseless as is barred by the Principles of Law
and hence same is liable to be rejected at once.
- Save and except the statements made in
the said application which are matter of record, the Opposite Parties
denies each and every allegations contained in the said application and
calls upon the petitioner to strict proof of the said allegations.
21.
That with reference to the paragraphs
no. 2, 3, & 4, the opposite parties dispute and deny the contents of such
paragraphs, since no piece of papers ever been submitted by the complainant to
the opposite parties and therefore such statements of the complainant is not in
knowledge with this opposite parties, however in the event of documents relied
on by the complainant are in original, in that event the statements related to
the documents are matter of record and therefore these opposite parties do not
put any comment so far, though for the balance statements of the complainant, these
opposite parties disputed and denied and put to the strict proof thereof to the
complainant, the opposite parties reiterate the facts as stated herein in the preceding
paragraph no. 17, and do not repeat for the sake of brevity.
22.
That with the reference to the paragraphs nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, of the application, this Opposite Parties deny and
disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what are the
matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite Party
repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no.17, herein above. The
opposite parties state that on good faith the opposite parties provide the
classes of IAS competitive examination to the complainant starting on and from
15/07/2017 in view to accommodate financial stringencies of the complainant and
whereas the complainant continued his classes till 03/09/2017 and thereafter
the complainant discontinue his classes without assigning any reason so far.
The complainant did never communicate and or assign any reason of his absence
from classes. However in the month of October, 2017, one letter has been
received by the opposite parties through post, which contains the letter dated
28/10/2017, wherein the complainant admitted the fact about course name, course
duration, course fees regarding the classes for the preparation of the IAS competitive examination and
consequently admitted the facts of his payments and thereafter put the allegation
about the manner of classes, which is his concocted, after thought story as to
discontinue his classes two folded aspects, at the first since he is a
Government employee, he is not able to accommodate himself for the classes and
timing thereof and at the second, he is not able to make the payment and
whereas in taking good faith, the complainant without making total payment and
submitting the admission form with the requisite documents and photographs
pursuing the classes since 15th July, 2017 to till 3rd September, 2017.
23.
That with the reference to the
paragraphs nos. 19, 20, 21, and 22, of the application, this Opposite Parties
deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what
are the matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite
Party repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no.17, herein
above. The opposite parties state that the opposite parties given their best to
the complainant at the stake of morality since the education cannot equate with
any commercial activities, it is preponderance parlance as of being a social
activity which input into intellectual property of the society and the country.
The opposite parties provide their best in view to assist the complainant
herein, so that he may enrich his dream to become as IAS officer of this
Country, and further submits that the complainant visited for pursuing courses
in IAS competitive examination and obtained broucher which contained admission
form. The complainant requested, as well
as placed his inability to make onetime payment as of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand) only and Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) only for
optional papers and asked that at the first he can make the payment as of Rs.
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only and thereafter he can make the balance
payment and in that event the opposite party suggest that on completion of
total payment only by the complainant, he may be able to join the classes,
since installment facility has not ever been ascertained for the classes of IAS
competitive examination. This opposite parties states that no cause of action
has ever been accrued on this opposite parties of the present proceeding and
therefore this opposite parties are not even means and or measure of any cause
and or event as described by the complainant herein. This opposite parties
states that the present petition of complaint is not bonafide against this
opposite parties, and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in
terms of her prayer made therein from this opposite parties in terms of the
provision of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986.
24.
That in the above circumstances, there
is no cause of action for the present proceedings by the petitioner, against
the opposite parties accordingly pray that the complaint be dismissed with
cost.
25.
That in the above circumstances, there
is no deficiency in service, and or unfair trade practices, on the part of the
opposite parties, rather the opposite parties are the victim of the concocted
story and wrongful demand of the complainant.
26.
That in view of the facts that the opposite
parties are victim of the alleged allegations and wrongful demand, the opposite
parties thereby seeking compensation as of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh)
only, for harassment and mental agony, arising from the institution of the
present proceeding by the complainant, against these opposite parties, before
the Hon'ble Forum.
27.
That the complaint is false, frivolous
and vexatious and has been filed with the malafide intention, and as such
deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost.
28.
That the documents being annexed with
the petition of complaint is relied upon by the opposite parties herein in the
present proceeding before this Hon'ble Forum.
29.
That the opposite parties crave
leave to produce any other necessary
documents and or papers, in the proceeding at the time of hearing and or
placing the evidence on Affidavit, before the Hon'ble Forum, in the interest of
administration of justice.
30.
That
the present complaint should be dismissed at once in terms of the
provision of section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as the same is
found frivolous and vexatious one, against these opposite parties.
It
is therefore prayed that your Honour would graciously be
pleased to
allow this written version of the opposite
party nos. 1 & 2, and to dismiss
and or reject the petition of complaint
at once filed by the complainant, against these opposite parties
herein, with costs, and or to pass
such other necessary order or orders
as your Honour may deem fit and proper for the
end of the justice.
And
for this act of kindness, your petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.
Verification
We, Smt.
Nibedita Halder (Ghosh ), and Smt. Manisha Halder, being the Opposite Parties,
in the instant Complaint matter, states that we are well conversant with all
the material facts and circumstances as stated in the foregoing paragraphs of
the written version and we are well
acquainted thereto. And we verify and sign this instant Written Version, as on
_______________2018, at Baruipur, Kolkata - 700144.
The Opposite Parties
Identified by me,
Advocate.
Prepared in my
Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated :
_____________________2018.
Place : Baruipur,
Kolkata - 700144
A
F F I D A V I T
We, Smt.
Nibedita Halder ( Ghosh ), Wife of Shri Chandan Halder, aged about _____years,
by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, working for gain at “The Aspirant”,
having its Head office at Sahebpara, Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700150, District –
South 24 Parganas, and Smt. Manisha Halder, Wife of Palash Ranjan Halder, about
_____years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, working for gain at “The
Aspirant”, having its Head office at Sahebpara, Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700150,
District – South 24 Parganas, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as follows
:
1.
That We being the Opposite Parties
nos. 1, and 2, in the instant case being filed by the Complainant and We are well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the said consumer case.
This is true to
my knowledge.
2.
That the statements made in paragraphs
1 to __________of our Written Version are true to the best of our knowledge and
belief and the rests are our humble submissions before your Honour’s Forum.
D E P O N E N TS
Identified by me
Advocate.
Prepared in my
Chamber,
Advocate.
Date :
_______________________2018.
Place : Baruipur,
Kolkata - 700144.
N O T A R Y
Comments
Post a Comment