DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ROPAR
Complaint received by way of E-Dakhil Portal
Consumer Complaint No.21 of 2022
Date of institution: 14.01.2022
Date of Decision: 25.05.2022
Amandeep Singh son of Sh. Baldev Singh, resident of Village Khanpur, PO Hafizabad, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar
…….Complainant
Versus
- Borosil Glass Works Limited, 1101, Parinee Crescenzo, G-Block, Bandra Kulra, Complex, Banda (East) Mumbai, Mahharashtra, India
- Bharat Crockery 2, Plot No.376, Industrial Area, Phase 2, Chandigarh
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Ranjit Singh, President.
Smt. Ranvir Kaur, Member
Present: Sh. Amandeep Singh, complainant in person
O.P. exparte
Order dictated by :- Shri Ranjit Singh, President
Order
This complaint received by way of E-dakhil portal. The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that on 22.12.2021, the complainant had purchased a new tiffin box from the OP amounting to Rs.1750/- vide bill No.3834. On the tiffin box, it was clearly mentioned that the food shall remain hot upto 7-8 hours and shall remain as it is put in the tiffin box. It was also assured by the OP No.2 that if it does not work as stated above then he will get back the same returned. However, the tiffin box did not work as assured by the shopkeeper and consequently, the complainant went to return the tiffin in question to the OP No.2 but the OP No.2 refused to change/return the same. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has sought to return the whole amount of Rs.1750/- with interest and further sought Rs.10,000/- as compensation
Complaint of the CC is signed, verified and duly supported by an affidavit.
2. Upon notice, the Ops have choosen to remain exparte vide our order dated 13.4.2022.
3. The learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 along with documents tax invoice Ex.C2 and copy of advertisement Ex.C3 and close the evidence.
4. We have heard complainant and have gone through the file, carefully and minutely.
5. The complainant has argued that the complainant had purchased a tiffin box and assured by the OP No.2 that food shall remain hot upto 7-8 hours but the tiffin box did not work as assured by the OP No.2 at the time of purchasing the same. The complainant went to the OP No.2 for returning the same but the OP No.2 refused to accept the request of the complainant. Lastly prayed to allow the complaint with cost.
6. Since the Ops have chosen to remain ex-parte and otherwise also the evidence of the complainant appears to be cogent, reliable and trustworthy. We have no alternative except to believe the contents of the complaint as well as documentary evidence attached with the complaint by the CC. It is, proved on the file that the complainant had purchased the tiffin box of Borosil company on 22.12.2021 for a sum of Rs.1750/-.In the present complaint, the star document is Ex.C2, placed on record by the complainant i.e. the advertisement of Borosil Tiffin, in this advertisement, it is clearly mentioned/written the food in it will stay hot for 8 hours. We have also perused the another document i.e. Invoice dated 22.12.2021 Ex.C1, placed on the record by the complainant.
7. It is important to mention here that as per Section 89 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, that Punishment for false or misleading advertisement; Any manufacturer or service provider who causes a false or misleading advertisement to be made, which is prejudicial to the interest of consumers shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extent to two years and with fine which may extent to ten lakh rupees; and for every subsequent offence, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extent to five years and with fine which may extent to fifty lakh rupees.
8. It is pertinent to mention here that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, is benevolent legislation enacted to help the poor consumers, which are being regularly harassed by the unscrupulous traders, who even after receiving the money do not provide the proper services to the consumers. We feel that the very purpose of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, will fail if such types of traders are not brought to book and asked to pay compensation. In this present case, the manufacturer has misled the complainant. The Ops were sold the tiffin to the complainant with the advertisement of being hot for 8 hours but Tiffin in question did not come out as per consumer satisfaction.
9. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint exparte and O.Ps are directed to refund Rs.1750/- to the complainant. The Ops are further directed to pay a an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. The OP is further directed to comply with the above said order jointly and severally within 30 days from the date of receiving of copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be indexed and consigned to record room.
May 25 , 2022
(Ranjit Singh)
(Ranvir Kaur)
