ORDER  

14.06.2018

S.K. SINHA, PRESIDENT.

                   The order directing the appellant (opposite party) to refund the price of Sofa set and centre table of Rs. 19,100/- within a period of two months failing which interest @10% shall be payable over the said amount till payment.

The complainant directed to return back Sofa set and centre table who was purchased by him Rs. 10,000/- was directed to be paid as compensation including litigation cost.

The complainant is that Sofa set and centre table purchased by the complainant for Rs. 19,100/- was made of inferior quality of wood, although the complainant was said that it is made of teak wood (Sisam). The Sofa became defective soon after purchase and on complain Sofa set was replaced however the same also became defective second time Sofa set was not replaced nor price was returned despite request as such the complaint filed for refund of the price with interest and litigation cost. The appellant (opposite party) denied the allegations that complainant was assured that Sofa is made of teak wood. It was further stated that the Sofa was sold having no guarantee or warrantee however for good professional relationship on the request of the complainant the Sofa was replaced but the complainant after some time again requested to the replace the Sofa again. The opposite party sent its worker to the complainant place it was found that the damages to the Sofa was caused due to negligence and carelessness although the opposite party was ready to repair the damages.

The District Forum considered the case found deficiency in service by selling the Sofa made of inferior quality of wood accordingly passed the impugned order.

Written notes of argument have been filed by the parties.

We have considered the perspective case of the parties, materials on record as also the impugned order. The District Forum accepted the case of the complainant that the Sofa set and centre table worth Rs. 19,100/- was Sisam wood as made to understand him. The teak wood is very costly wood the price of Rs. 19,100/- for request could not be accepted which the complainant should also should have realized it. Moreover once the Sofa set was replaced even though the opposite party had mentioned in its sale receipt that goods once sold cannot be taken back. The worker of the opposite party visited the place of the complainant where it was found that the Sofa set is kept carelessness with negligence which was the cause of the damages. In the such situation no deficiency in service can be validly attributed against the appellant sale of Sofa set and centre table in question. The impugned order is set aside.

In the result, the appeal stands allowed.

  Renu Sinha                                                                             S.K. Sinha

   Member(F)                                                                             President

        Agam.