Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/327/2018

P Athipathy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Asif Briyani & Anohter - Opp.Party(s)

M/s D Saravanan

19 Jul 2019

ORDER

                                                                          Date of Filing  : 25.04.2018

                                                                          Date of Order : 19.07.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.327/2018

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 19^TH DAY OF JULY 2019

                                 

P. Anithpathy,

S/o. Mr. Pasupathy,

No.9, Ragavendra Nagar,

Nathambedu,

Thiruninravur,

Chennai – 602 024.                                                         .. Complainant.   

                                     

                                                                                          ..Versus..

1. Aasife Biriyani,

Represented by its Authorized Officer,

No.208, Anna Salai,

Thousand Lights,

Near Thousand Light Mosque,

Chennai – 600 006. 

 

2. Aasife Biriyani,

Represented by its Authorized Officer,

No.47, C.T.H. Road,

Ambattur,

Chennai – 600 053.                                               ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for the complainant  :  M/s. D. Saravanan & another

Opposite parties 1 & 2            :  Exparte

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties 1 & 2 under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to provide the computer generated bill for the complainant’s son’s birthday function and to pay a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, hardship and deficiency in service to  the complainant with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that on 15.06.2017, he celebrated his son A.S. Rushith’s Birthday function in the 2^nd opposite party’s restaurant.  The complaint made arrangement for dinner for the said function with the 2^nd opposite party.  The complainant booked dinner for 50 persons. The 2^nd opposite party informed that the cost of dinner would be Rs.55,080/-.  The complainant also paid an advance of Rs.28,000/- on 15.06.2017 itself.  The complainant agreed to settle the balance amount at the time of completion of function.  The complainant submits that during the function in and around 60 members alone participated.  The 2^nd opposite party raised bill for 135 persons.  The complainant states that he demanded a computer generation bill with the 2^nd opposite party at the time of paying advance of Rs.28,000/- but the 2^nd opposite party has given only manual bill.  Hence the complainant had issued a legal notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2 on 20.08.2017 demanding to give computer generated bill but till date there was no response from the opposite parties 1 & 2.    The complainant also further issued another legal notice dated:04.12.2017 to the opposite parties claiming  compensation for the deficiency in service.   The act of the opposite parties 1 & 2 amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.     In spite of receipt of notice, the opposite parties 1 & 2 has not been appeared before this Forum and hence, the opposite party was set exparte.

3.     Though the opposite parties 1 & 2 remained Exparte, this Forum is to dispose this compliant fully on merits with available materials before this Forum. 

4.     In such circumstances, in order to prove the allegations made in the complaint the proof affidavit is filed by the complainant as his evidence, and also documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 are marked.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, hardship and deficiency in service as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a computer generated bill with a cost of Rs.25,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

The opposite parties 1 & 2 after receipt of notice has not appeared before this Forum and set exparte. The complainant filed his written arguments.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that on 15.06.2017, he celebrated his son A.S. Rushith’s Birthday function in the 2^nd opposite party’s restaurant.  The complaint made arrangement for dinner for the said function with the 2^nd opposite party.  The complainant booked dinner for 50 persons. The 2^nd opposite party informed that the cost of dinner would be Rs.55,080/-.  The complainant also paid an advance of Rs.28,000/- on 15.06.2017 itself.  The complainant agreed to settle the balance amount at the time of completion of function.  Further the contention of the complainant is that during the function in and around 60 members alone participated.  The 2^nd opposite party raised bill for 135 persons.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A1, it is very clear that on 15.06.2017, while paying a sum of Rs.28,000/- towards advance, the 2^nd opposite party issued a bill very clearly stating that quantity as 135 total amount including VAT to the tune of Rs.56,080/- which is handwritten.  None of the bill issued to the complainant generated by the computer.  It is very clear that the complainant paid only a sum of Rs.28,000/- alone as advance.  The complainant has not produced any document to prove that only 60 persons alone participated in the birthday function.  It is apparently clear that the complainant has booked for 135 persons as per Ex.A1. Equally, the complainant has not produced any document for the balance payment of Rs.28,080/-.  The complainant has also not stated suitable reason for claiming computer generated bill after accepting Ex.A1, the handwritten bill. The law is well settled that ‘a defaulter cannot maintain a consumer complaint’.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that this complaint has to be dismissed.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 19^th day of July 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	15.06.2017	Copy of bill issued by the 2nd opposite party
Ex.A2	15.06.2017	Copy of photos of Birthday function
Ex.A3	20.08.2017	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant and postal receipts
Ex.A4	04.12.2017	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant and its postal receipts

 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT