Haryana

Panchkula

CC/238/2021

SHIVAM VASUDEVA. - Complainant(s)

Versus

BOMBAY HANDLOOM . - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

26 Apr 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	238 of 2021
Date of Institution	:	17.05.2021
Date of Decision	:	26.04.2022

 

Sh.Shivam Vasudev, S/o Sh. Suresh  Kumar, # 1598, Sector-15, Panchkula .

                                                                           ….Complainant

Versus

Bombay Handloom, SCO-217, Manimajra, Chandigarh.

….Opposite Party

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019

 

Before:              Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.

 

For the Parties:   Complainant in person.

Defence of OP already struck off vide order dated 25.11.2021.

ORDER

(Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member)

1.             The brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant bought a pair of mattress of Silicon Company from the OP on 23.05.2020 with five years warranty. After few months, the mattress started giving problem to him and his family when used to sit or sleep on mattress, the mattress used to get compressed all down leaving a hole behind and also got very uncomfortable during the night. After facing too much difficulties, the complainant visited to the shop of OP and told him the problems which they had been facing since long and even showed him practically by laying down on his mattress but the OP denied to solve the problem of the complainant and harassed him a lot. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment and financially; hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notice, the OP has appeared through his counsel/ Advocate to contest the present complaint; but hedid not file the written statement despite availing several opportunities including the last opportunity. Therefore, the defence of OP was struck off by this Commission, vide its order dated 25.11.2021. 

3.             To prove his case, the ld. Counsel for the complainant has tenderedaffidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-3 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

4.             We have heard the complainant and gone through the entire record available on record including written arguments filed by the complainants, minutely and carefully.

5.             During arguments, the complainant reiterated the averments made in the complaint contending that the pair of mattress of Silicon Company, which was purchased from OP on 23.05.2020 vide invoice (Annexure C-1) amounting to Rs.6,700/-having a warranty of five years as per invoice as well as guarantee card(Annexure C-2), became defective as it got compressed after a few months. It is contended that the complainant as well as his family members faced the sleeping problem on account of defective mattress. It is further contended that the OP denied to replace the defective mattress despite the fact that defect in the mattress has arisen during the warranty period and thus, it is prayed that the OP be directed to refund the purchase price to him alongwith compensation on account of mental agony, physical harassment and litigation charges.

6.             On the other hand, the OP after putting its appearance through counsel 02.08.2021, 03.09.2021, 28.09.2021 failed to appear on 03.11.2021 and on the said date i.e. 03.11.2021 the case was adjourned to 25.11.2021 for filing written statement subject to last opportunity. On 25.11.2021, the defence of the OP was ordered to be struck off as it has failed to file written statement despite several opportunities and thus, the averments made by the complainant are unrebutted and uncontroverted.

7.             The learned counsel for the OP vehemently argued that the OP was ready to replace the mattress in question and the complainant was requested to wait for 5-6 days till the defective mattress were replaced with new one from the manufacturer company. The learned counsel contended that the complainant raised unnecessary hues and cry and created a very bad scene in the presence of the other shopkeeper and customers. The learned counsel denied that the OP behaved with complainant in a very rude manner and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the complaint. 

8.             As stated above, there is no written version in the shape of written statement corroborated by affidavit and documentary evidence of the OP controverting the contentions and assertions   of the complainant. It is well settled legal proposition that mere bald assertions which are not corroborated and substantiated by any adequate, cogent and credible evidence do not carry any evidentiary value.

9.             On the other hand, the version of the complainant is fully supported and corroborated by his affidavit Annexure C-A, along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-3. And thus, the OP has been found deficient while rendering services to the complainant; hence, theOP isliable to compensate the complainant for the deficiency on itspart.

10.            As a sequel to the above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OP:-

1. To pay a sum of Rs.6,700/- to the complainant, along with interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the complaint till its realization subject to return of pair of the mattresses to the OP.
2. To pay a lump sum amount of Rs.5,000/- to complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and cost of litigations charges.

11.            The OP shall comply with the directions/order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order to OPs failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OP. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance. 

Announced on: 26.04.2022

 

        Dr.Sushma Garg          Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini          Satpal

                Member                     Member                     President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                        Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini

                                            Member