Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 460.
Instituted on : 20.09.2018.
Decided on : 09.08.2019.
Satyawan s/o Sh. Tejram, age 52 years, R/o Village Makroli Kalan, Tehsil & District Rohtak.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
Ansh Bajaj(10829) Sheela Bye Pass Near Sagar Villa Hotel, Delhi Circular Road, Rohtak.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Opposite party exparte.
ORDER
VED PAL, MEMBER:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased one Center stand and safety stand from the opposite party for Rs.470/-. That complainant was asked to install the same at home and if he installed the stands from them, then they will charge Rs.150/- for installation of stands. That opposite party mentioned Rs.80/- as labour charges for installation of stands whereas stands were not installed by the opposite party on the motorcycle. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to refund the amount of labour charges and also to pay compensation of Rs.10000/- on account of mental agony and harassment to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the opposite party company cannot sell the original part on the counter without fitting the same in the vehicle and this fact was brought in the notice of complainant at the time of selling the part and he was also told that he would be charged Rs.80/- as labour but if he returns the old stand, Rs.80/- charged from him would be reimbursed to him. Complainant did not bother to return the old stand and has filed the present complaint just to cause pressure upon the respondent to meet his illegal demand. The respondent is ready to refund Rs.80/- to the complainant subject to returning of old stand. It is prayed that the present complaint may kindly be dismissed with heavy costs.
3. Complainant in his evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed his evidence on dated 08.02.2019. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite party failed to appear before the Forum at the time of evidence and the opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 13.06.2019 of this Forum.
4. We have heard the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the complainant, we have observed that opposite party has not installed the stands whereas illegally charged Rs.80/- from the complainant. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. It is also on record that opposite party did not appear despite service and as such it is presumed that opposite party has nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite party regarding illegally charging of Rs.80/- from the complainant stands proved. Hence the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and it is directed that opposite party shall refund the amount of Rs.80/-(Rupees eighty only) charged as labour charges and also to pay a sum of Rs.1500/-(Rupees one thousand five hundred only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, failing which opposite party shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. on the awarded amount from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
09.08.2019.
..........................................
Ved Pal Hooda, Member.
……………………………….
Renu Chaudhary, Member
