Delhi

East Delhi

CC/88/2016

MAHIP BANSAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

DREAMZ PRODUCTIONS - Opp.Party(s)

26 Feb 2019

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 88/16

 

Dr. Mahip Bansal,

Bansal Hospital & Test Tube Baby Centre,

Sisra, Haryana

                                                               ….Complainant

 

Vs.

         

M/s Dreamz Productions

C-4/28, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1,

Delhi- 110091

Through its

1. Authorized Representative
2. Head, Marketing

                                                                                    …Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 17.02.2016

Judgement Reserved on: 26.02.2019

Judgement Passed on: 20.03.2019

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

          The present compliant has been filed by Dr. Mahip Bansal, the complainant against M/s Dreamz Productions, the OP alleging deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.

          Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that in the month of July 2015, OP approached the complainant who is running hospital in the name of Bansal Hospital and Test Tube Baby Centre, Sirsa, Haryana, luring them with the offer of providing a world class programme/ documentary/ advertising promo for the promotion of complainant’s hospital. It has been stated that the programme included a promo capsule of one minute with professional artists and a documentary CD to be telecasted on national TV near Diwali. On 20.07.2015 the complainant agreed to purchase the advertisement package for Rs. 45,500/- after signing MOU. The said amount was paid vide cheque no. 268467 dated 23.07.2015 on the completion of video shooting. It has been further stated that the complainant was assured regarding the timely delivery of the documented CD within 15 days, but the OP had failed to provide the services as agreed despite of the full payment. An e-mail dated 23.08.2015 was written to the OP when the officials of OP did not respond to the telephonic calls made by the complainant. After much deliberation documented CD was shared with the complainant, but the complainant was shocked to see that it was merely a simple compilations of the recording by the officials of OP, which lacked the conceptualization and professional touch as promised by OP.

          Legal notice dated 30.11.2015 was sent to OP which was neither replied nor complied with, hence, the present complaint seeking directions to OP to refund Rs. 45,500/- alongwith interest @18% per annum; Rs. 1,00,000/- for compensation on account of mental harassment and agony and Rs. 25,000/- as cost of litigation.

          The complainant has annexed e-mail dated 20.07.2015, MOU, bill issued by OP of date 22.07.2015, cheque issued to OP, e-mails exchanged on various dates between the complainant and OP, legal notice of date 30.11.2015 alongwith track report with his complaint.

          Notice of the present complaint was served upon OP, however, no reply was filed by them despite opportunity and since they chose not to appear on subsequent dates they were proceeded ex-parte.

          Ex-parte evidence was filed by the complainant where they have reiterated the contents of their complaint on oath and have relied on the documents annexed with the complaint. The complainant had got exhibited the copy of e-mail dated 20.07.2015, MOU and proof of payment as Ex. CW1/1 to Ex. CW1/3 respectively, copy of e-mail dated 23.08.2015 as Ex.CW1/4, e-mail dated 18.09.2015 as Ex.CW1/5. Legal notice dated 30.11.2015 has been exhibited   Ex. CW1/6.

          We have heard the submission of Ld. Counsel for Complainant and have perused the material placed on record. The complainant is aggrieved by the non delivery of the services as promised in the MOU and as declared by OP in their e-mails. Since, OP chose not to file their reply, the allegations made by the complainant have remained un-rebutted. As the complainant had paid    Rs. 45,500/- to the OP in lieu of the package and OP has failed to fulfill their part of obligation, which is evident from e-mail dated 18.09.2015, where the complainant has stated that  the CD was mere compilation of what was recorded by the camera man and it lacked the ingredients as promised by OP. This definitely amounts to deficiency in services as well as unfair trade practice.

          From the above discussion we hold OP liable to pay Rs. 45,500/- alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till realization. We also award Rs. 15,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment, this shall be inclusive of litigation expenses.

This order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order else compensation shall also carry interest @9% per annum from the date of order till realization.

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

          File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

 

  (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)                                                      (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                     Member                                                                              President