BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SRI.  P.V. JAYARAJAN                               : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                           : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.                                             : MEMBER

C.C.No. 52/2022 Filed on 07/02/2022

ORDER DATED: 26/12/2022

ORDER

SRI.P.V. JAYARAJAN, PRESIDENT:

1. This is a complaint filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and the matter stood over to this date for consideration.  After hearing the matter the commission passed an order as follows:
2. This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party.  After accepting the notice though an Advocate filed Vakkalath for the opposite party, no written version was filed by the opposite party within the stipulated 45 days time. 
3. The case of the complaint in short is that the complainant is entrusted the interior design work of her newly constructed house to the opposite party who is running the establishment under the name and style Pickle Bowl Interiors.  For the said purpose agreement was also signed between the complainant and opposite party.  In pursuant to that agreement an amount of Rs.2 lakhs was paid to the opposite party by online transaction.  As per the agreement, the opposite party has agreed to complete the interior work on or before 10/12/2021.  Subsequent to that the complainant came to know from some other clients of the opposite party i.e., Pickle Bowl Interiors that their works are indefinitely delayed by the opposite party firm and they are also not attending the telephone calls from other clients.  After coming to know about such bad experience of their clients with the opposite party establishment, the complainant transacted the agreement signed by the complainant with the opposite party.  On enquiry the complainant came to know that the opposite party has not started any work in connection with the interior designing of the complainant’s house.  Hence the complainant send a letter to the opposite party informing the fact that she is not willing to further proceed with the agreement executed between the complainant and the opposite party and further demanded refund of Rs.2 lakhs paid by the complainant to the opposite party towards advance payment for the work undertaken by the opposite party.  As the opposite party failed to refund the amount of Rs.2 lakhs paid by the complainant, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, the complainant approached this Commission for redressing her grievances.              
4. The evidence in this case consists of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P5 marked on the side of the complainant.  As the opposite party has not adduced any evidence or marked any documents, there is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party.
5. Issues to be considered:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice

               on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the complainant is entitle to the relief claimed in the
3.  
4. Order as to cost?

6. Heard. Perused records, affidavit and documents.  To substantiate the case of the complainant, the complainant sworn an affidavit as PW1 and Ext.P1 to P5 were produced and marked.  Ext.P1 is the quotation for Kitchen Designing the opposite party to the complainant.  Ext.P1 (a) is the estimate for the proposed work undergone by the opposite party.  Ext.P2 is the agreement.  Ext.P3 is the online receipt for payment of Rs.2 lakhs by the complainant to the opposite party.  Ext.P4 is the letter issued by the complainant to the opposite party demanding refund of Rs.2 lakhs from the opposite party.  Ext. P5 is the copy of the Aadar card of the opposite party.  There is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party.  From Ext.P2 agreement shows that the opposite party has received 2 lakhs as advance from the complainant.  Ext.P3 receipt also substantially prove the fact that the complainant has paid Rs.2 lakhs to the opposite party by online transaction.  Ext.P1 quotation and P1(a) estimate coupled with Ext.P2 agreement, it is evident that the complainant has entrusted the Kitchen Interior Design work to the opposite party.  So it is evident that the complainant has availed the service of the opposite party by paying consideration for the same.  By swearing an affidavit as PW1 and by marking Ext.P1 to P5 documents, we find that the complainant has succeeded in establishing her case against the opposite party.  In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite party to discredit the evidence adduced by the complainant, we accept the evidence adduced by the complainant.  From Ext.P3 online receipt it is evident that since 25/10/2021, the amount of Rs.2 lakhs paid by the complainant is with the opposite party.  There is no evidence from the side of the opposite party to prove that they have started any works in connection with the Interior Design of Kitchen of the complainant’s newly constructed house.  From the available evidence before this Commission we find that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.  It is also evident that the complainant has suffered mental agony and financial loss due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.  As the mental agony and financial loss by the complainant were caused due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, we find that the opposite party is liable to compensate the losses sustained by the complainant.  In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in favour of the complainant.

In the result the complaint is allowed.The opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with 6% interest form 25/10/2021 along with Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) towards cost of this proceedings to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost shall carry interest @9% from the date of order till the date of realization/remittance.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 26^th day of December,  2022.

C.C. No. 52/2022

APPENDIX

1. COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

2. COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

3. OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

4. OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                                                                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                                                                               PRESIDENT