Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/495/2015

Trinity Hospital and Medical Research Institute - Complainant(s)

Versus

Cyber Safe - Opp.Party(s)

Sahil Khunger

28 Sep 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	495 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	03/08/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	28/09/2016

 

 

 

 

 

Trinity Hospital & Medical Research Institute, SCO 352-355, Swastik Vihar, Patiala Road, Zirakpur, Distt. SAS Nagar, Mohali, through its Chairman Dr. Mohinder Kaushal.

 

….Complainant

VERSUS

 

Cyber Safe through its Partner/ Owner Mr. Rohit Punia, 181/37, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh. Alternative Address: - C/o SSDIT, 19-20, Harmilap Nagar, Phase-I, Baltana, District Mohali.

…… Opposite Party

 

 

BEFORE: DR.MANJIT SINGH                     PRESIDENT

              MRS.SURJEET KAUR                  MEMBER

              SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA    MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Sahil Khunger, Advocate.
For Opposite Party	:	Ex-parte.

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, MEMBER

              The facts, in brief, are that the on being approached by the Opposite Party for installing HD Card, the Complainant, who is a reputed Doctor and is running Trinity Hospital & Medical Research Institute to earn his livelihood, agreed to the same, and made an advance payment of Rs.25,000/- plus taxes amounting to total of Rs.28,900/- through RTGS on 29.09.2014 (Annexure C-2). The installation was promised to be done at the earliest. However, when inspite of numerous requests, e-mails, followed by reminders (Annexure C-3 to C-6) and eventually, legal notice dated 01.04.2015 and reminder thereto (Annexure C-6 & C-7), the Opposite Party failed to refund the advance payment or to install the HD Card, alleging the said acts amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.

2.        Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party, seeking its version of the case. Since nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte.
3.        Complainants led evidence.
4.        We have perused the record with utmost care and circumspection.
5.        In the present circumstances, the Opposite Party has not appeared to contest the claim of the Complainant and preferred to proceed ex-parte which draws an adverse inference against it. The evidence of the Complainant has gone unrebutted against Opposite Party. It is established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. It is evident from account statement (Annexure C-2) that the amount of Rs.28,900/- was transferred through RTGS by the Complainant into the account of the Opposite Party (Mr. Rohit Punia). It is borne on record that when the Opposite Party failed to install the HD card, the Complainant had also made effort to approach the Opposite Party through e-mails (Annexure C-3 to C-5) and legal notice (Annexure C-6), but the grievance of the Complainant has not been redressed. It is pertinent to note that during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the Complainant sought relief of balance payment of Rs.18,600/- as the remaining amount of Rs.10,300/- has already been refunded by the Opposite Party. This fact is evident from Para No.6 of the legal notice (Annexure C-6). The harassment suffered by the Complainant at the hands of the Opposite Party is therefore writ large. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the Opposite Party.
6.        In the light of above observations, the present complaint succeeds against the Opposite Party. The same is allowed. We direct the Opposite Party to:-

 

[a]   To refund the balance amount of Rs.18,600/- to the Complainant.

 

[b]   Pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service to the Complainant; 

 

[c]    Pay Rs.2,000/- towards costs of litigation;

 

7.        The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Party; thereafter, Opposite Party shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-paras [a] & [b] above from the date of institution of this Complaint, till it is paid, apart from costs of litigation mentioned in sub-para [c] above. 
8.        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

28^th September, 2016                                                          

Sd/-

[DR.MANJIT SINGH]

PRESIDENT

             

          Sd/-

[SURJEET KAUR]

MEMBER   

 

Sd/-              

[SURESH KUMAR SARDANA]                                                                                                   

“Dutt”                                                                              MEMBER