CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM Vs. S.V.V.S.AUTOMOBILES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite parties are the appellants. The appeal is challenge to the order passed by the District Forum which passed the award against the appellants for refund of a sum of Rs. two lakh with interest, as also compensation and costs.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant submitted tender with a demand draft for Rs.2 lakh enclosed thereto on 27th June, 2003 for the cellular service dealership. The deposit of Rs.2 lakh was refundable. The opposite parties confirmed the bid of the complainant on 19-12-2003 subject to submission of the relevant documents by the complainant before 30th December, 2003 and the show room to be ready by 20th January, 2004. On account of his daughters marriage, the complainant could not submit the documents till 3rd June, 2004 and after submitting the documents he has requested the opposite parties to finalize the process of the allotment for which there was no response from the opposite parties. The complainant has issued reminder on 27th June, 2004. After a period of twenty days, the opposite parties informed through letter that the allotment of the dealership of the complainant was cancelled and the deposit was forfeited. The complainant addressed letter dated twenty seventh July, 2004 requesting the third opposite party to revoke the cancellation of allotment, but there was no response from the opposite parties. The complainant has got issued notice through his advocate either to revoke the cancellation of allotment or refund the deposit with interest and compensation.

(3.) The opposite parties resisted the claim of the complainant. The first opposite party has filed counter and the other opposite parties have adopted the counter filed by the opposite party no.1. It was contended that the bid of the complainant was accepted for the cellular service distributor at Vijayanagaram. The opposite parties issued confirmation letter dated 19th December, 2003 informing the complainant that his bid was accepted subject to two conditions, first the complainant should submit the relevant documents on or before 30th December, 2003 and the show room should be made ready by 20th January, 2004 failing which the allotment of dealership would be cancelled and the EMD would be forfeited. The complainant has requested through telegram dated 29th December, 2003 for extension of time for two weeks for submitting the documents. The opposite parties had extended the time till 13th January, 2004 for the complainant to submit the documents. Again the complainant sought for extension of time on 12th January, 2004 and 14th January, 2004, in the last week of Fenruay, 2004 finally and on 5th March, 2004. As the complainant has not entered in the agreement after a long period of time, the opposite parties had cancelled the dealership of the complainant on 30th April, 2004.