EAGLE ULTRA-MARINE INDUSTRIES Vs. PARAMOUNT POLLUTION CONTROL P LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant firm is manufacturing altra-marine blue at 137, GIDC, Odhav, Ahmedabad. They invited offer from the persons interested to supply air pollution consultancy services from their chemical unit. Under the advertisement, offers were invited for designing, installing and commissioning air pollution control measure on Turn-Key basis. In paragraph 5, the complainant has averred that the service consultant was required to measure pollution level independently and design the control measure, install at the complainant's premises, commission the same to the satisfaction of G. C. P. B. and to train two operators for future operation, etc. The advertisement has been annexed to the complaint at Annexure (1) to the complaint and it reads as under:-

(2.) The Opposite Party accepted the offer and quoted the fees for their services, firstly Rs.1,55,000/-. Subsequently, however, the same was increased by quarrying Rs.56,000/- bringing the total at Rs.2,11,000/-. The offer was accepted and various payments were made by the complainant Again the fees were increased to the tune of Rs.2,29,000/- in all. The complainant then alleges that he has made 97% payment against the quotation of Rs.2,29,000/-, that is to say, the firm has paid Rs.2,23,246/- as per the particulars shown in para 12 of the complaint. It is then the case of the com- plainant that the opposite party has, however, not fulfilled its part of the contract even within the extended time limit and has still not completed its part of the contract and is refusing to comply with the same. The Complainant has further averred that the Opposite Party has also adopted unfair trade practice of recovering money and not giving the services as required to be given by them under the agreement. It is also the complainant's grievance, further, that the opposite party has failed in rendering the services required from them and, therefore, they have committed breach of the service contract and that it is because of their negligence in designing the Air Pollution control system that the same is not workable and is not as per the standard required by G. C. P. B. and, therefore, according to the complainant, the opposite party is liable to refund the amount of Rs.2,23,246/- paid by the complainant alongwith 18 percent interest from the date of payments.

(3.) In response to our summons, the opposite party has appeared and filed its version, raising the preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the complaint on the ground of our jurisdiction to entertain the same, contending inter-alia that the question that arises is a question of interpretation of the contract and that the same can be decided by the Civil Court only and not by this Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The Opposite Party has also contended that they are not adopting any unfair trade practice.