Wednesday, October 16, 2024

Written Version in Consumer Case

 

 

 

District : South 24-Parganas.

 

Before the Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, at Alipore Judges Court, Alipore, South 24 – Parganas.

 

                                                                        C. C. no. 106 of 2013.

 

                                                                        In the matter of :

 

                                                                        Gopal Chandra Choudhury, ___Complainant.

 

-          Versus –

 

Sri Soumen Chakraborty, ___Opposite Party.

 

 

Written Version of the Opposite Party, Sri Soumen Chakraborty.

 

 

The humble petition of the above named Opposite Party, Sri Soumen Chakraborty, 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 the Complaint is not maintainable in its present form.

 

3 :        That the Petition is speculative, harassing, motivated and barred by the Principles of Law and hence it is liable to be rejected at once.

 

4 :        That the Opposite Party 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.

 

5 :        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.

 

6 :        That the Opposite Party states that the Complainant disputes is not a Consumer Disputes as defined and enumerated in the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, as such the Agreement for Sale dated 18th day of January’ 2012, was cancelled and rescind by the Complainant himself and whereas in view of such facts, that the said Agreement has already been cancelled, and a substantial amount has already been paid to the Complainant by the Opposite Party on different dates, after cancellation of such Agreement for Sale.

 

7 :        That the Opposite Party states that the in the present Complaint, the Complainant seeks money of dishonor of Cheques and Bank Charges etc. which is specifically and more particularly,  are not the case of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, and such disputes as to relief prayed for are not fall well within the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986.

 

8 :        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.

 

9 :        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.

 

 

10 :      That in the above circumstances, there is no cause of action for the present proceedings by the Petitioner, against the Respondent / Opposite Party, the Respondent / Opposite Party, accordingly pray that the Complaint be dismissed with costs.

 

11 :      That the Petitioner, neither has any cause of action nor the basis for filling the present complaint and the Petitioner’s complaint is entirely baseless and misconceived and deserve to be dismissed on this ground alone.

 

12 :      That the Complaint is false, frivolus and vexatious and has been filed with the mala fide intention, and as such deserves to be dismissed with special costs.

 

13 :      That the Petitioner, is not entitled to any relief as prayed in the Complaint, and the same is liable to be dismissed.

 

14 :      That in the aforesaid circumstances, the Opposite Party / Respondent is seeking the dismissal of the Complaint filed by the Petitioner, with exemplary cost.

 

 

Verification

 

I, Soumen Chakraborty, being the Respondent / Opposite Party, in the instant Complaint matter, states that I am well conversant with all the material facts and circumstances as stated in the foregoing paragraphs of the written version and I am  well acquainted thereto. And I verify and sign this instant Written Version, as on _______________2013, at Kolkata.

 

 

 

The Opposite Party / Respondent.

 

Identified by me,

 

Advocate.

Prepared in my Chamber,

 

Advocate.

Dated : ___________2013.

Place : Kolkata.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment