Date of filing:- 23/08/2017.
Date of Order:-11/12/2019.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT)
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Complaint No. 40 of 2017.
Sangadhar Panigrahi, aged about - 50(fifty)years, S/o Late- Ghanashyam Panigrahi, Permanent R/o Sagar para, Balangir Po/Ps/Dist. Bolangir, At Present R/o Ashakiran Residency, Q.No-SDX-17, P.o-Dang, P.s. Town P.s.- Bargarh Dist- Bargarh.
..... ..... ..... Complainant.
-: V e r s u s :-
Renew Dry Cleaners, Bargarh Branch, At-Bhatli Chowk, P.o./P.s/Dist-Bargarh, Represented through it’s Agent Suresh Nepak, S/o Late Kunjbihari Nepak, R/o-Hatpada, Ward No. 6(six), Bargarh.
Akash Pandey, S/o-Not Known the counter attendant of Renew Dry Cleaner, Bargarh Branch At-Bhatli Chowk, Bargarh.
Renew Drycleanes, Head Office at Chaitanya Nagar, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- :- Sri L.Behera, Advocate with associate Advocates.
For the Opposite Party No.1(one)
and No.2(two) :- Ex-Parte.
For the Opposite Party No.3(three) :- Sri D.Mihra, Advocate with associate Advocates.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Ajanta Subhadarsinee ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.11/12/2019. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra, President:-
Brief Facts of the Case ;-
Being persuaded by the provision U/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986 The complainant has filed the case against the Opposite Parties with the allegation of unfair trade practice and Deficiencies of service on the ground as envisaged hereunder.
The Opposite Partiesno-3 is running it’s dry cleaning business at Bargarh at Bhatli Chowk,Bargarh through O.P.No-1 ,namely Suresh nepak & 2 through the o.P.1 & 2 ,who were running the same as it’s agent and counter attendant respectively , wherein the Complainant gave three pieces of double blankets,one pieces of single blanket, three Numbers of jackets and one blazer, for dry cleaning with the O.P.No-1 in it’s shop against which he was issued with a receipt to that effect with a promise to return the same within 15 days by the O.P .no-1 & 2 .
On receipt of the receipt slip which was printed in the name of the O.P.No-3 then the O.P.No-1 & 2 told him that they are running the same Business by the same in the name of the O.P.No-3 and there would not be any problem with that , there after on completion of 15 days when the complainant went to the said shop and demanded for his Clean clothes the O.P.No-1 & 2 told him to wait for some more days in this way he visited for several time for the purpose but at last on Dt12.03.2017 the O.P.No-1 Returned him only one blazer and three Jackets and surprisingly told him that rest three Numbers of double blankets and one single blankets are not being traced out and as such the O.P.No-2 issued him with the receipt with his endorsement showing the delivered clothes and the said pending clothes .
In furtherance to his case the complainant has reminded them for several time to return the remaining clothes but to no result ,consequently the Complainant approached the O.P.No-3 about the matter and asked him to return his clothes over phone but to no effect there too, and lastly on Dt.5.06.2017 the O.P.1 and 3 denied to return him the same and asked him to do whatever he likes , which of such acts on the part of the O.Ps are unfair trade practice and deficiencies of service as per the complainant consequent upon which he sustained a loss of Rs.67,389/- in total( in support of which the money receipt of the individual items are filed herewith) besides that also he suffered a lot mentally ,emotionally and physically which amounts to Rs.1,00,000/-.Thus he preferred to take the shelter of the Forum claiming Dt.22.01.2017 when he handed over the Clothes for dry cleaning ,on Dt,7.02.2017,when the O.P.No-1 promised him to return his clothes and on Dt.12.03.2017 when he did not return the three numbers of double blankets and one single blanket and finally when the O.P .denied to return those four Blankets and has claimed the said amount of Rupees in total Rs.1,67.389/-and Rs.10,000/- towards Litigation expenses.
The Complainant has relied on the following documents in support of his case,i.The Money receipts of the Blankets from where he has purchased and a still phato shoot of the location and the shop concern.
Having gone through the Complaint petition ,the documents filed in support of his Claim and on hearing the learned counsel for the Complainant ,the case was admitted and Notice was served on the Opposite parties for their appearance before the Forum , but surprisingly the O.P.No-3 only appeared and filed his version but the rest O.P.No-1 & 2 did not respond to the same and as a result of which they were set ex-partie on Dt 22.11.2017.
And so far as the version of the O.P No-3 is concerned it is a denial one to the case of the Complainant ,it has denied to have it’s shop at the alleged place and also has denied to have received any such claimed clothes from the complainant and also denied to know the O.P.No-1 & 2.he has further contended in his version to be ignorant of the total case of the Complainant mentioning therein that he never receive any Clothes in his shop directly rather he deals with his business through online only , subsequently thereafter he has contended in his version that he has never supplied with any such receipt with his same franchise shop as such the same alleged receipt might have been manufactured by the O.P.No-1 , and also after knowing the fact of the particular issue he has terminated the franchises agreement with the O.P.1. thus he has claimed to dismiss the case against him for want of merit in it ,And in support of his such claim has relied on some documents ,i.Book report Dt.01.09.2016 to 30.04.2017 generated by his shop ,ii.work Note summary report ..12 sheet.
Perused the Complaint it’s supporting documents and the version of the O.P.No-3 , and heard the learned counsels of the respective Parties ,out of which the following issues have come up for proper adjudication of the case,i.Whether the opposite Parties have committed unfair trade practice and deficiencies in rendering service towards the Complainant.ii. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the relief as has been sought for.
Firstly while dealing with the issue No-1 ,having gone through the entire materials available in the record and keeping the submission of the respective counsels of the parties ,it came to our Notice that the Complainant has given the alleged clothes to the O.P.1& 2 in the shop namely called Renew dry cleaner in the address mentioned against their name in the cause title having been issued with a receipt by them against the same which was in the name of the O.P.No-3 and also it has been found to be true that endorsement has been made in the said receipt while part of the Cleaning materials were returned to the Complainant which cannot be brushed aside in the absence of the O.P.No-1 & 2 ,rather the same is taken to be true especially because of the intentional absence of those two persons even after been served with Notice from the Honorable Forum, further more it has been observed from the contention of the O.P.No-3 in his version in para No-5 wherein he has admitted to have given his shop in franchises to the O.P.No-1 & wherein the o.p No-2 was working as counter caretaker and after knowing the fact of the case has terminated their franchises authority with his business ,but the facts remains that in the para No-1 of his version where he has denied to have any relation with those Opposite Parties or with the receipt issued if at all by them , so the Contradiction of the version of the O.P.No-3 has made us belief that the total episode of the case is well known to the O.P.No-3 and it was his prime duty to look after the way of his said business going on in his said shop and if at all found any discrepancies in that then it is his duty to make good the loss of his customer ,to which he has tried to avoid by saying that if such incident occurred then the Complainant should have taken criminal action against them ,which speaks of his attitude of unfair trade practice and deficiencies of service towards his customer because as has admitted by him in the said paragraph that he is the absolute owner of the same having given the same to the O.P.No-1 in franchises so in view of such circumstances we are of the view that the O.P.No-3 along with O.P.No 1&2 are jointly and severally liable for their act of unfair trade practice coupled with deficiencies of service accordingly it is answered in assertive to the Case of the Complainant .
Secondly while dealing with the issue with regard to the relief claimed by the complainant ,it is to our observation he is the true owner of those clothes and also it has been established that the same were received by the O.P.No-1 & 2 on behalf of the O.P.No-3 being the franchise owner of the same and has also it has been established from the receipt and the endorsement made thereon by the O.P.No-1 to the effect of return of part of the total numbers of clothes that the remaining numbers of costly clothes are not returned to him and instead of that the O.P.No-3 is shifting it’s responsibility and the O.P.No-1 & 2 have not bothered to appear before the Forum so it is obviously a case of unfair trade practice coupled with deficiencies of service on their part with joint and several liability ,as in our prudent and consensus view the Complainant is entitle for the relief claimed for , hence is answered accordingly in his favor ,our order follows.
-: O R D E R :-
Hence the Opposite parties are being jointly and severally liable are directed to pay the cost of Rs.67389/- with interest @ 6% P.A. from the date of filing of the case to the complainant and also directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/-towards the mental and financial harassment undergone by him ,within thirty days from the date of receipt of the order in default of which the total amount would carry an interest @ 12 % P.A. till the actual realization of the total amount .
Accordingly the order is pronounced in the open Forum ,and in the result the complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties and the same is disposed off to-day i.e. on Dt.11/12/2019.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
( Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra)
P r e s i d e n t.
I agree,
( Ajanta Subhadarsinee)
M e m b e r (W).
Uploaded by
Sri Dusmanta Padhan
Office Assistant, Bargarh.
