CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.

Present

Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Presidient(I/C)

Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member

                                            

   CC No 142/12

                                    Tuesday the 30^th day of October,2012

 

Petitioner                                              : C.K. Punnen

                                                               Chirayil House,

                                                               Ettumanoor PO,

                                                               Kottayam-6

                                                               (Adv.Francis Thomas)

                                                            Vs.

 

Opposite party                                     : Ajith Ramachandran,

                                                               Darsana Marbles,

                                                               S.H.Mount PO,

                                                               Kottayam 686 006.

                                                             (Adv.Anil D. Kartha)

 

 

            The crux of the complainant’s case is as follows:-

            The complainant booked Granites, Vitrified tiles, shower enclosure and other allied items from the opposite party’s shop for an amount of Rs.3,43,000/-. The complainant paid an advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 18/7/11. At the time of booking the items were not available in the showroom. The opposite parties assured the complainant that new stock will arrive within 15 days. On 21/7/11 the opposite party issued an estimate for an amount of Rs.3,43,000/- but he has not supplied the same within the assured time of 15 days. The complainant approached the opposite party several times and demanded for the supply of items booked by him. After several adjournments for the supply of items, the opposite party finally agreed to supply the items in the 1^st week of September. Based on that assurance the contractor arranged expert persons from Ernakulam for laying the tiles. The complainant had to pay Rs.10,000/- to the employees.     On realizing the fact that the opposite party is not in a position to supply the items to the complainant, he purchased the said items from Cochin Granites, Pala in January 2012. After that the complainant demanded return of the advance amount several times. At last the opposite party issued cheque dtd 15/2/12 for an amount of 1,00,000/- and on presentation of the cheque the same was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account. Against the dishonour of the cheque a criminal case is pending on the opposite party. Due to the non supply of items within the stipulated time the complainant suffered financial loss and mental pain. The complainant alleged that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties and filed this complaint claiming Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000 as litigation cost.

            Notice was served to the opposite party and he entered appearance and showed readiness to settle the matter. But the opposite party failed to settle the matter and has not filed version even after so many postings. Hence opposite party was set expartee.

i)                    Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?

ii)                   Reliefs and costs?

Evidence consists of the expartee affidavit filed by the complainant and documents Ext.A1 to A3.

            Heard the complainant and perused the documents placed on record. The complainant averred that he booked granites, vitrified tiles, shower enclosure and other allied items from the opposite party’s shop for an amount of Rs.3,43,000/- and paid an advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Evidencing the said averment the complainant produced the original estimate issued by the opposite party and it is marked as Ext.A2. From Ext.A2 it is understood that the complainant had paid an advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the opposite party. The complainant next averred that the opposite party did not supply the items in time and requested more time for the supply of the same. It was further averred by the complainant that the opposite party promised to supply the booked items in the 1^st week of September and based on the said assurance he arranged expert persons for laying the tiles to whom the complainant had to pay Rs.10,000/- as laying charge. The complainant again averred that as the opposite party failed to supply the booked items in time, he was forced to purchase the said items from Cochin granites Pala.

 The complainant stated that on demanding refund of the advance money the opposite party issued a cheque dtd 15/2/12 and on presentation of the cheque it was dishonoured due to “insufficiency of funds” of the account of the opposite party. The copy of said cheque is also produced and it is marked as Ext.A3. It is submitted by the complainant that a criminal case is pending against the opposite party regarding the dishonour of the cheque. The complainant alleged that due to the non supply of the booked items within the stipulated time, he suffered financial loss and mental pain. As the opposite party chose not to contest the allegations and averments of the complainant against the opposite party remain unchallenged.   As the advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- is not yet refunded by the opposite parties, the complainant admittedly suffered a monetary loss of 1,00,000/- and its interest from the date of payment 21/07/11 till this date. Due to the non supply of booked items in time, the complainant suffered the related other monetary losses and mental agony. On scanning the complaint and the documents placed on record we feel that the opposite party had committed deficiency in service and is liable to compensate the mental agony and financial loss suffered by the complainant. In our opinion, the ends of justice will be met by allowing a compensation of Rs.1,10,000/-. Point no.1 is found accordingly.

            In view of the findings in point no.1 the complaint is allowed.

            The opposite party will pay a compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- to the complainant for the non delivery of booked items on the assured date of delivery and for issuing the cheque of Rs.1,00,000/- which was dishonoured on presenting due to “insufficiency of funds”. The opposite party will also pay a litigation cost of Rs.1000/- to the complainant.

 

            This order will be complied with within one month of receipt of copy of the order failing which the awarded sums will carry interest @ 10% per annum from the date of order till relaisation.

 

Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30^th day of October, 2012.

 

Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Presidient(I/C)            Sd/-                                        

Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-

                                                                       

Ext.A1- receipt dtd 18-7-11

Ext.A2-estimated dtd 21-7-11

Ext.A3-copy of cheque dtd 15-2-12

 

By Order,

 

Senior Superintendent.