SRI. SAJEESH.K.P : MEMBER
The complainant has filed this complaint under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, seeking direction against the OP to repay Rs.1,15,500/- which was paid by complainant to OP and also pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards mental agony to the complainant .
Complaint in brief :-
According to the complaint, OP is a business man in jewellery field who has branches nationally and internationally. In the year 2018,November a representative from OP’s showroom visited complainant to canvas him about a scheme namely Chemmanur Gold + Diamonds Advance”. The said scheme is based on installments upto one year and if complainant joined the scheme he will get benefited to purchase gold at the rate of then period or he will get the amount along with interest which he deposited. On 26/11/2018, complainant joined the scheme A3695 by paying Rs.1000/- and a total amount of Rs.1,15,500/- paid within year. At the time of joining the scheme, gold rate was Rs, 23,000/- and it became Rs.26,000/- at the end of the scheme. Moreover, OP’s representative made complainant to believe that he can purchase gold without any making charge. But, unfortunately when complainant approached OP’s showroom after the expiry of scheme to purchase gold OP’s representative told that complainant can purchase gold only at the present rate of gold and he should pay making charges also. Hence the complainant decided to not to purchase gold and he demanded his amount deposited in the scheme along with interest and OP requested some more time. Therefore, on 2020 November first week complainant approached to collect his amount which he paid in the scheme. But OP’s representative misbehaved and the complainant came to know that he is not only the victim of this scheme but there are many. Hence this complaint.
After filing the complaint, commission sent notice to OP. OP entered appearance before the commission and filed their version accordingly .
Version of OP in brief:
The OP denies the entire averments except those specifically admitted . The OP admits the membership of complainant vide A3695 at OP’s showroom and the deposit of Rs.1,15,200/-. The OP contended that they never visited complainant to persuade him to join the scheme. It is the complainant came to the showroom after seeing the advertisement to join the scheme and at that time salesmen there at well explained the terms and conditions of the scheme. The scheme is governed by rules and regulation stipulated in the brochure and it is stated in Malayalam that the member of the scheme can make instalment payments and they can purchase 22ct(916) gold ornaments during or after the end of scheme equal to the amount deposited at the prevailing price on the date of purchase and also stated if the purchase is made before the expiration of scheme they have to pay making charges and also specifically stated the amount paid could not be returned except gold of equal value of the amount deposited. The complainant was not ready to receive the same. At the time of joining , OP supplied brochure to complainant and he is aware of all the stipulation in the scheme. The OP is still ready to give gold ornaments as per the terms of scheme of the value of amount deposited. The OP never practiced any unfair trade practice or any deficiency in service. The complaint filed by complainant to only extract money from OP and its devoid of merit and hence is liable to be dismissed with cost.
Due to the rival contentions raised by the OP to the litigation, the commission decided to cast the issues accordingly.
- Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the side of OP?
- Whether there is any compensation & cost to the complainant?
In order to answer the issues, the commission called evidence from both parties. The complainant produced documents which is marked as Exts.A1 to A4. Ext.A1 is the photocopy of customer card issued by OP dtd.26/11/2018, Ext.A2 is the photocopy of Gold advance CGP11 receipt issued by OP dtd.26/9/2019 .Ext.A3 is the lawyer notice and Ext.A4 is the reply notice. The complainant adduced evidence through proof affidavit and examined as PW1. OP produced one document marked as Ext.B1 ,brochure. No oral evidence from the side of OP.
According to the evidences before the commission to answer the issue No.1&2, looked into Ext.A1 which is the customer card of Chemmanur Gold Diamond Advance issued by OP to complainant which there is no dispute with regard to the membership of complainant in the aforesaid scheme. The OP admitted the amount of Rs.1,15,500/- paid by complainant. On the perusal of Ext.A2 it is seen that the cash will not be refundable is stated. In order to answer the point raised by complainant as well as OP regarding the terms and conditions. Ext.B1 is looked into by the commission, as per Ext.B1, the terms and conditions stated that the amount in cash will not be refunded and the customer can purchase the gold at the prevailing gold rate at the time when the scheme ends without any making charges. They also stated that if the customer purchase gold before the scheme date ends then there will be making charge. As all these stipulations are persists in Ext.B1, the complainant during the cross examination deposed that he availed the brochure and had the acquaintance of the terms and conditions. So the dispute raised by complainant that he required the gold equal to the value of paid amount based on the then rate at the time of joining the scheme will not stand. Once the terms and conditions are mutually agreed by parties to the contract by act one cannot be unilaterally withdraw. It will repudiate the contract. Moreover complainant approached OP after about one year of the scheme date end and during the cross examination complainant didn’t explain the reason of delay but only a mere statement of denial. The OP never sent a notice to complainant to intimate that the scheme become matured on November 2019. Hence the commission is in the view that there is deficiency in service from the part of OP. So OP is directed to give gold jwellery, equal to the value of amount deposited by complainant ie, 1,15,500/- under the scheme at the rate prevailed in the year November 2019. The OP is failed to intimate complainant about the maturity of the scheme they are liable for the deficiency in service. Hence complainant is entitled to get compensation.
In the result complaint is allowed in part, the opposite party is directed to give gold jwellery, equal to the value of amount deposited by complainant ie Rs.1,15,500/- under the scheme of the rate prevailed in the year November 2019 or opposite party is directed to return the amount of Rs.1,15,500/- to complainant which he was deposited under “Chemmannur Gold purchase scheme” with interest @12% per annum from the maturity date ie ,November 2019 till realization and also pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost of litigation to the complainant within 30 days of receipts of this order. Failing which complainant is at liberty to file execution application against opposite party as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Exts:
A1-Customer card
A2- Gold Advance CGP11 receipt
A3-lawyer notice
A4-Reply notice
B1-Brochure
PW1-Rajesh.A- complainant
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
eva
/Forwarded by Order/
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
