IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM
Dated this the 5th day of April 2018
Present: - Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President
Sri. M.Praveen Kumar,Bsc, LLB ,Member
CC.No.24/2017
Subair Kuty : Complainant
S/o Muhammed Kunju
Kottakkakathu Thekkathil
Valathungal P.O
Kottikkada
[By Adv.P.Deepa, Kollam]
V/S
Biju : Opposite party
Proprietor
Athira Studio ,
Koottikkada P.O
Kollam
ORDER
SRI. M. PRAVEEN KUMAR, MEMBER
This is a case based on a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by one Subair Kutty against the opposite party seeking compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh . Complainant’s case is that complainant is having two children. The elder male son is working in Gulf countries . The younger one is a daughter . The daughter’s marriage was fixed on 03/01/2016 since the son cannot attend the marriage function complainant intend to copy all functions in connection with marriage in videograph. Hence he approached the opposite party who agreed and demanded a sum of Rs.7500/- and other incidental expenses for taking videography of entire marriage ceremony including the reception which was scheduled to the conducted on the previous day evening of marriage ie on 02/01/2016. Further more the opposite party asked to give the entire charges of video before taking the same on the previous day evening of marriage.
2
On 02/01/2016 the opposite party came with all necessary equipments for videography. The complainant gave the entire charges Rs.7500/- immediately when the opposite party came to the auditorium, before starting of taking videography of the reception. The complainant repeatedly asked the opposite party to take videography of each and every moments of reception and marriage for viewing the same by his son who is in gulf country which is the only way left for his son. The opposite party finished videography of the entire reception
ceremony at 9 PM and promised to come on the next morning. On the next day the opposite party came by 8.30 AM. The opposite party promised that CD will be ready within two weeks and will be handed over to complainant .
After two weeks complainant approached the opposite party. The opposite party said that the final finishing works are going on and will take some more time to finish it. The complainant waited for another two weeks but the opposite party did not call him or gave the CD as agreed. After 1½ months the complainant personally approached the opposite party for getting CD . The opposite party did not gave the CD inspite repeated demands directly and over phone. Finally the opposite party gave a CD after a long period in the months of July. But the said CD belongs to another marriage function. The complainant informed the opposite party but opposite party apologized and said that the CD was mistakenly changed and will be corrected soon. The opposite party did not turned up on the Acharam day though it was decided to take the videography by complainants side and potography by the brides side. The son-in-law’s family also waited for the CD and the complainant had to say several excuses to them. Furthermore the son of complainant in Gulf who was unable to be present in marriage lost the only opportunity to see the only sisters marriage through video which cannot be compensated in any manner .Hence the complainant approached the Forum seeking compensation.
3
Though the opposite party received notice issued by the Forum, he has neither appeared nor filed any written version or co-operated with the trial. Hence the opposite party was set exparte.
The complainant filed affidavit in liew of chief examination as PW1 and one witness has been examined as PW2. The unchallenged evidence endorsed by PW1 & PW2 coupled with Ext.P1 to P7 series documents would establish the following. The marriage of the complainants daughter taken place on 3.01.2016 . On the previous day evening there was reception of the marriage.
The unchallenged version of PW1&PW2 in their proof affidavit would establish that the opposite party is the proprietor of the said studio that the complainant arranged the opposite party to take videography of all the ceremonies inconnection with the marriage and reception taken place on 03.01.2016 and the previous day evening. That the opposite party has agreed to take videography and received an amount of Rs.7500/- in advance and taken the videography of complainant’s daughter’s marriage and reception function. Ext.P5 series, photograph would prove that the opposite party had taken the videography covering the marriage function of the daughter of the complainant. The complainant several times approached to the opposite party for the CD and finally the opposite party given video CD of another marriage. Ext.P6 series are the original photographs of the daughter and son-in-law of the complainant. But Ext.P7 series photographs taken from the video taken by opposite party covering the marriage ceremony are not the actual photographs of the daughter and son-in-law of the complainant. Hence it is clear that the opposite party has given photographs marriage function of yet another person. It is also brought out in evidence through the oral evidence of PW1 and Ext.P2 lawyer notice that inspite of the demand of the complainant to hand over the actual videographs taken by the opposite party covering the marriage and related functions the opposite party failed to comply with the direction. The unchallenged averments
4
in the proof affidavit of PW1 and PW2 coupled with Ext.P1 to P7 documents would establish that there is gross negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. According to PW1 as the opposite party has not handed over the actual photographs taken by him covering the marriage and related functions of his daughter he sustained loss of Rs.7500/- already given to the opposite party and also sustained mental agony and there fore the complainant is entitled to get back the fee already charged Rs.7500/-
and compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.3000/- being costs of the proceedings.
In the result, the complaint stands allowed directing the opposite party to return the fee charged by him amounting to Rs.7500/- and Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.3000/- as costs of the proceedings within 45 days from today failing which the complainant is entitled to realize Rs.17,500/- with interest @9% per annum from the date failing the complainant till realization with costs Rs.3000/- from opposite party and his assets.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt.Deepa.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 5th day of April 2018.
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim: Sd/-
M.Praveen Kumar: Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
5
INDEX
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext.P1 : Wedding Card
Ext.P2 : Lawyer Notice
Ext.P3 : Postal Receipt
Ext.P4 : Acknowledgement card
Ext.P5 : Photographs(4 No.s)
Ext.P6 : Marriage photo
Ext.P7 : Photographs(3 No.s)
Witness examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite parties:-Nil
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-
President
M.Praveen Kumar:Sd/-
Member
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
