PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 30th day of November 2011
Filed on : 24/08/2011
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member. Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 460/2011
Between
Noorjahan Beevi A : Complainant
W/o. O.U. Abdul Khader, (Party-in-person)
Ottathengungal house,
Kedamangalam,
N. Paravur, Pin-683 513.
And
Baby, : Opposite party
Mangalath Optical house, (By Adv. M.K. Faisal,
Opp. Government Hospital, Ambuja Arcare, Canal
Main road, N. Paravur-683 513. Road, North Paravur)
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The case of the complainant is as follows:
On 18-06-2011 the complainant purchased a spectacles from the opposite party at a price of Rs. 5,000/-. Since its glasses had scratches the complainant could not use the same and the frame is of substandard quality and it appears to be a used one. On the next day onwards the complainant approached the opposite party on several occasions either to replace the same with a new one or to refund the price. But the opposite party did not do so. Thus the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite party to refund the price of the spectacles together with compensation of Rs. 3,000/- and costs of Rs. 2,000/-. This complaint hence.
2. The version of the opposite party
The complainant did not purchase spectacles from the opposite party on 18-06-2011. On 18-06-2011 the complainant approached the opposite party selected a frame and lenses and placed order for the same. The price agreed by the parties was Rs. 5,000/-. Accordingly the opposite party made ready the spectacles on
21-06-2011. The complainant refused to accept the same for her own reasons. As a goodwill gesture on 25-06-2011 the opposite party replaced the spectacles with another model and issued bill to the complainant. After a week the complainant approached the opposite party to replace it with tinted glasses. The opposite party rejected the request since such facility was not available in the opposite party’s shop. There was no defect in the spectacles at the time of delivery, If at all any defect was there, she was to return it at the time of delivery. Complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs as claimed.
3. Neither side mounted the box to adduce oral evidence. Exts. A1 to A3 and B1 were marked on the side of the complainant and the opposite party respectively. Heard the complainant who appeared in person and the learned counsel for the opposite party.
4. The points that came up for consideration are
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price
of the spectacles and the frame?
ii. Compensation and costs of the proceedings?
5. Point No. i. During the proceedings in this Forum the complainant produced the spectacles for our examination per se. After examination on the face of the same, it seems there is merit in the contentions of the complainant.
6.According to the complainant on 18-06-2011 she paid a sum of Rs. 1,500/- for lenses and Rs. 3,500/- for the frame as per Ext. A1. On the contrary the opposite party vehemently contented that they have received Rs. 1,144/- only on 25-06-2011 as per Ext. B1 retail invoice.
7. It is pertinent to note that the opposite party does not mention any thing about Exbt. B1 or the price of spectacles in their version which goes not to sustain their case. Moreover the opposite party admitted in the version that the price of the spectacles agreed between the parties was Rs. 5,000/-. So the contention of the opposite party is unsustainable and uncontestable. Since the spectacles and the frame supplied by the opposite party are prima-facie defective the opposite party is liable to refund the price of the same to the complainant especially so since she had to purchase another spectacles from elsewhere to meet the exigencies of situation.
8.Point No. ii. As claimed by the complainant and not repudiated by the opposite party the complainant has had to run from pillar to post to get her grievances redressed, this calls for compensation. We fix it at Rs. 1,000/- in order that such events shall not be repeated wherever. An amount of Rs. 500/- is also awarded as costs of the proceedings.
9. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct as follows:
i. The opposite party shall refund Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant being the price of the Spectacles and the frame. In that event the complainant shall return the defective spectacles and the frame to the opposite party simultaneously.
ii. The opposite party shall pay Rs. 1,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 500/- towards costs of the proceedings to the complainant for the reasons stated above.
The above said order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order failing which the above amounts shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. till realization.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30th day of November 2011.
