Complainant Anil Kumar has filed the present complaint against the opposite party U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite party to replace the study table. Opposite party be further directed to pay Rs.70,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension, litigation charges and financial loss in the interest of justice.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he has purchased a study table on 28.11.2020 at 6.45 PM by paying Rs.950/- to the opposite party, who has not issued a correct bill but an unsigned estimated bill was issued to him. The payment was made through debit card. He has next pleaded that when the study table was opened at his house, he found a crack in the stand support. He visited the opposite party on Monday dated 30.11.2020 to get the table replaced but opposite party refused to do so. On that day opposite party handed over the correct bill to him. He further mentioned that a notice dated 23.12.2020 has been sent to opposite party but opposite party has not replied to it. Later on opposite party denied replacement saying it as a baby item but it is mentioned as study table in the bill. The defective item has not been replaced by opposite party and hence the complaint.

 3.          Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party who appeared through its counsel and filed its written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present Commission and is liable to be dismissed; the complainant has not approached this Hon'ble Commission with clean hands and concealed true and material facts from this Hon'ble Commission; the complaint of the complainant is totally false and the complainant is stopped by his act and conduct from filing the present complaint. On merits, it was submitted that at the time of selling the study table, the opposite party checked the same to the complainant properly complete in all respect as there is no provision in our showroom to keep the damaged article. The study table was duly checked by the complainant at the time of its purchase, but thereafter it was got damaged with the sole negligence on the part of complainant. There is every possibility that some heavy article has been placed on study table by the complainant or any of his family members, as a result of which it got damaged. Moreover, there is no guaranty of study table as told to the complainant. In order to please the complainant, the opposite party requested him to repair the study table, but the complainant did not listen the opposite party, rather threatened that he will meet them in Court.  It was next submitted that the complainant made the payment of study table through card, but he did not collect the bill and the same was handed over to the complainant on Monday i.e. 30.11.2020. The complainant was attended by Neetu official of opposite party and he was fully satisfied at the time of purchasing the study table. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.   

4.       Alongwith the complaint, complainant has filed his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A alongwith other documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4.

5.      Alongwith the written statement ld.counsel for the opposite party filed affidavit of Sh.Deepak Pathania, Branch Manager of S.B.I. Ex.OP-1 and copy of document Ex.OP-2.

6.            Written arguments have been filed by the opposite party.

7.          We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for the complainant; oral arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the parties for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

8.      As per invoice dated 30.11.2020 placed at Ex.C-1 the complainant purchased a study table which shows the payment made by card swipe on 28.11.2020 as it was purchased on 28.11.2020. It is alleged by complainant that one stand support of above mentioned table has been found damaged when it was opened for use at home on 28.11.2020. It is further alleged that opposite party has denied its replacement when he approached opposite party on 30.11.2020, the intermediate day being Sunday. Complainant also placed a photograph of damaged of table at Ex.C-4

9.     Opposite party in their written reply denied all the allegations. It is admitted by opposite party that complainant purchased the said table on 28.11.2020 and bill was issued on 30.11.2020. It is pleaded by opposite party that item was OK at the time of delivery and it might have damaged due negligence of the complainant, and it is covered under warranty.

10.      From the above detailed facts of the case, it is made out that as the item has been found defective immediately after its purchase so question of warranty does not arise. It is the duty of the supplier to deliver the goods in good and working condition and resolve the complaint of the purchaser, if any. But in this case opposite party failed to resolve the complaint of the complainant. Hence it amounts to be deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

11.    We are of the considered opinion that complainant deserve the replacement of the said defective item or refund of the amount paid.

12.      In view of the aforesaid discussion considering the facts and circumstances of the case the present complaint is hereby partly allowed and opposite party is directed to replace the study table within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. Opposite party is further directed to pay lumpsum amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses.  However, if the similar table is not available, opposite party is at liberty to refund the amount paid by the complainant within the stipulated time given above.

13.        The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

14.    Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.                                                                                                                                                             

                                                                                (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                                                                             President   

               Announced:                                                                                                         (B.S.Matharu)

             September 30, 2022                                                                                             Member

            *MK*