BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.203 of 2021
Date of Instt. 02.06.2021
Date of Decision:18.04.2022
Tajinder Singh Bawa Age about 52 Years Son of S. Surjit Singh Resident of Village No.14, Saffron Residency, Near Hotel Ramada, Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. Darshan Singh M/s Kawality Palace, Behind Kings Hotel Near Bus Stand, Garha Road, Jalandhar.
2. Jaspal singh Chhabra C/o M/s Kawality Palace, Behind Kings Hotel Near Bus Stand, Garha Road, Jalandhar.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Sh. H. S. Makkar, Adv. Counsel for the Complainants.
OPs No.1 & 2 exparte.
Order
Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein he has alleged that the OP No.1 is the owner of M/s Kwality Palace, which deals in high class wooden furniture and the OP No.2 is the son of OP No.1 who deals customer of M/s Kwality Palace. That on the inducement of OP No.2, complainant agreed to purchase sofa set 9 seater with table on 17.01.2021 and deals was settled in Rs.38,000/- and on the same date 17.01.2021 complainant have paid an amount of Rs.1000/- through swapping of card and remaining amount was agreed to be paid by the complainant as and when demanded by the OPs. That on 18.01.2021 the OP No.2 send his carpenter Satwinder Singh to the house of the complainant for taking measurement of the place where the sofa is to be placed and on asking of OP No.2, complainant have paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- to Satwinder Singh, who is the representative of the OPs. On 27.01.2021 the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.27,700/- in cash to the OP No.2 and OP No.2 delivered the sofa set and table at the residence of complainant on 29.01.2021 with a guarantee of 10 years. After seeing the placing of the said sofa set in complainant house, the sofa was not upto standard, mark and design given by the complainant to the OP No.2 and complainant immediately made a call to OP No.2. The OP No.2 requested the complainant that he will take back this sofa and will make the same upto the mark and design of complainant. After about a week the OPs took one piece of the sofa for checking and rectification and returned the same after one week, but in the same condition with no improvement. Then again the complainant made calls to the OPs many times but OPs stopped picking the calls of the complainant which created a great mental harassment to the complainant. Since 29.01.2021 the complainant had requested many times to the OPs for the replacement of the defective sofa with a new one, but the OPs refused to do so. The complainant is very much harassed, humiliated and given mental agony and physical harassment on the part of the OPs by not replacing the sofa which is defective one and which is under guarantee and warranty. The complainant had also moved a legal notice dated 24.03.2021 to both the OPs, but all in vain and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund full amount of the cost of Sofa i.e. Rs.38,700/- alongwith interest @ 24% per annum from the date of its purchase till realization. Further OPs be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental tension, physical harassment and financial loss etc. cause to the complainant.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service both the OPs did not appear and ultimately, both the OPs were proceeded against exparte.
3. In order to prove his exparte version, the counsel for the complainant produced on the file his respective evidence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the case file very minutely.
5. The complainant has proved on record that he purchased sofa set 9 seater with table from OP for Rs.38,000/-. Ex.C-1 is the copy of account statement of the complainant, whereby it is proved that the complainant has given Rs.1000/- as earnest money to the OP on 17.01.2021 for purchase of said sofa set from the OP. He has paid the entire amount of Sofa to OP as per his sworn affidavit Ex.CA. There was a guarantee of 10 years, which is evident from Ex.C-2. The sofa was not upto standard, mark and design given by him to the OP No.2 as per the photographs Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-8. But the OPs failed to rectify the same despite many requests through telephonic calls, copy of the screen shot of making calls to the OP is Ex.C-9. The complainant also sent legal notice dated 24.03.2021 to the OP, but all in vain.
6. Since the OPs are exparte, therefore no reply and no defence is there to be relied upon and ultimately, the allegations of the complainant remained un-rebutted and un-challenged because there is no rebuttal evidence on the file qua the allegations of complainant. So, in the absence of any evidence, on the part of the OPs and considering the un-rebutted evidence of the complainant, the complainant is held entitled for the replace of the defective sofa with new one, to the satisfaction of the complainant within 15 working days from the date of receipt the copy of order, failing which the OPs are directed to refund the full amount of the sofa i.e. Rs.38,700/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of purchase till realization and further OPs are directed to pay Rs.8000/- as compensation including litigation expenses for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
7. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
18.04.2022 Member President
