BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 01/09/2014
Date of Order : 10/12/2014
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.
Smt. V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.
C.C. No. 648/2014
Between
A. Praveen, | :: | Complainant |
Prarthana House, Drishya Nagar, Eroor, Tripunithura. | (Party-in-person) |
And
Branch In charge, Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., | :: | Opposite Party |
2nd Floor, Angels Arcade, South Kalamassery, Ernakulam – 682 022. | (By Adv. Biju Hariharan, M/s. KNB Nair Associates Advocates, 2nd Floor, Morning Star Buildings, Kacherippady, Ernakulam, Cochin – 18.) |
O R D E R
V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.
1. This complaint is filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in supplying a damaged Dining Table, which he had purchased for Rs. 21,834.06 with 14.5% tax thereon.
2. In spite of service of notice from this Forum, the opposite party opted not to contest the matter for reasons best known to them. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A3 were marked on his side. Heard the complainant who appeared in person.
3. Ext. A1 would go to show that the complainant on 13-06-2014, the complainant purchased furniture to the tune of Rs. 80,000/- from the opposite party. According to the complainant on 20-08-2014, the dining table purchased from the opposite party became defunct and in spite of repeated requests and reminders, the opposite party failed either to replace the product or to refund its price. Exts. A2 and A3 e-mails dated 22-08-2014 and 29-08-2013 would show that the complainant highlighted his grievances with the opposite party, but in vain. During the proceedings in this Forum, the complainant has produced the disputed dining table for our verification. We find that the dining table is in a damaged condition and it cannot be used in dwelling house. The present condition of the dining table would indicate that it suffers from inherent manufacturing defect. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the dining table with interest @ 12% p.a.
4. Had the opposite party paid any attention towards genuine grievances of the complainant, this complaint could have been avoided. The non-response of the opposite party against Exts. A2 and A3 e-mails and also to the notice issued from this Forum shows the guilt of the opposite party. The complainant had to approach this Forum to redress his grievance of spending his valuable time and money. Compensation and costs are called for. We fix it at Rs. 5,000/-.
5. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and we direct as follows :-
The opposite party shall refund the price of the dining table of Rs. 21,834.06 with 14.5 % tax thereon to the complainant together with interest @ 12% p.a. from 13-06-2014 till realisation.
The complainant is directed to return the defective dining table to the opposite party simultaneously at the cost of the opposite party.
The opposite party shall pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant towards compensation and costs of the proceedings.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 10th day of December 2014.
Sd/- V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.
Sd/- A. Rajesh, President. Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of the order/challan dt. 13-06-2014 |
A2 | :: | Copy of the e-mail dt. 29-08-2014 |
A3 | :: | Copy of the e-mail dt.22-08-2014 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
Depositions :: Nil
