Date of Filing 21.08.2023

                                                                                                       Date of Disposal: 30.01.2024

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

THIRUVALLUR

BEFORE TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, MA. ML, Ph.D (Law),                                          …….PRESIDENT

               THIRU.P.VINODH KUMAR, B.Sc., BL,                                                                                ……MEMBER-I

               THIUR.P.MURUGAN, M.Com, (ICWA), BL.,                                                                     ……MEMBER-II

CC.No.73/2023

THIS TUESDAY, THE 30^th DAY OF JANUARY 2024

Mr.Edward Satish,

No.3/731, Annai Velankanni Nagar,

Madanandapuram,

Porur Chennai – 600 125.                                                                       ......Complainant.

                                                                                   //Vs//

The Authorized Signatory,

FURNY, Standard Information Service Private Limited,

Building No.A3, Gala No.106-111,

Harihar Complex,

Dapoda Village, Mankoli Naka,

Bhiwandi Thane, Maharashtra -421 302.                                        ……Opposite party.

Counsel for the complainant                                           : M/s.T.K.S.Gandhi, Advocate.

Counsel for the opposite party.                                      : Exparte.

This complaint coming before us on various dates and finally on 22.01.2024 in the presence of M/s.T.K.S.Gandhi, counsel for the complainant and opposite party was set exparte for non appearance and upon perusing the documents and evidences of complainant’s side this Commission delivered the following:

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY TMT.Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT

1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party in selling a defective product along with a prayer to direct the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.36,814/- being the cost of the product with 24% interest and to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant along with litigation expenses.

Summary of facts culminating into complaint:-

2. It was the case of the complainant that he had purchased a recliner sofa by online from the opposite party’s concern and paid Rs.36,814/- vide invoice No.2021-22/B2C/6484, dated 04.04.2022. When opened the package he was in utter shock to see that the product had manufacturing defects. Hence he initiated a complaint request and described the matter to the opposite party.  The opposite party sent a technician who confirmed the defects as manufacturing defect. Thereafter the opposite party’s concern took back the furniture for repair on 05.06.2022 but till today the same was not returned and no refund was also made. Hence the complainant had suffered mental agony and harassment by the act of the opposite party.  Thus aggrieved by the act of the opposite party the present complaint was filed to direct the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.36,814/- being the cost of the product with 24% interest and to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant along with litigation expenses.

3. On the side of the complainant proof affidavit was filed and documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex A9 were submitted. Though notice was served to the opposite party on 15.11.2023 he did not appear before this commission to file any written version and hence he was called absent and set exparte on 15.12.2023 for non filing of written version within the mandatory period as per the statute.

Points for consideration:-

1)    Whether the alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the opposite party has been successfully proved by the complainant in the matter of selling the product with manufacturing defect and in not rectifying the same nor replacing or refunding the cost of the product?

2)    If so, what relief the complainant is entitled to?

 Point No.1:-

The following documents were filed on the side of complainant in support of their contentions;

a)     Tax Invoice was marked as Ex.A1;

b)    Emails sent by the opposite party to the complainant were marked as Ex.A2 to Ex.A7;

c)     Legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party 21.12.2022 was marked as Ex.A8;

d)    Aadhar card of the complainant was marked as Ex.A9;

 4. Heard oral arguments of complainant and perused the material evidences and written argument filed by him.

5. The complainant had purchased furny Wilson 2 Seater Leatherette Recliner Sofa by online mode for a sum of Rs.36,814/- on 03.04.2022.   When the product was delivered on 22.04.2022, he found it with some manufacturing defect which was reported immediately to the opposite party.  The opposite party sent. Technicians who confirmed the manufacturing defect.  Thereafter, the product was taken back by the opposite party with assurance that it would be made good and returned.  But till today the same was not returned and no refund was also made.

6. We found that the opposite party had committed clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the documents submitted by the complainant.  Vide emails the opposite party had clearly acknowledged the defect in the Sofa and also did not deny the return of the product to them for rectification of defect.  The complainant had discharged the burden of proof by sufficient evidence.  In the fact and circumstances selling the product and then receiving it back on the guise of rectification and not returning the same clearly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  The opposite party did not appear to rebut the complaint allegations.  Thus we hold that the complainant had successfully proved the deficiency in service against the opposite party.

 Point No.2:-

With regard to relief as the opposite party had made the complainant to suffer we award a compensation of Rs.50,000/- along a direction to refund the Sofa cost within six weeks from the date of receipt of order.  We also award Rs.5,000/- cost.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed against the opposite party directing them

 a) To refund a sum of Rs.36,814/- (Rupees thirty six thousand eight hundred fourteen only) being the cost of the product to the complainant within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

 b) To pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant;

c) To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses to the complainant.

d) Amount in clause (a) if not paid within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, an interest at the rate of 6% will be levied on the said amount from the date of complaint till realization.

Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this 30^th day of January 2024.

      Sd/-                                                      Sd/-                                                            Sd/-                                                                                                                         

 MEMBER-II                                        MEMBER-I                                              PRESIDENT

List of document filed by the complainant:-

          Sd/-                                                          Sd/-                                                   Sd/-

MEMBER-II                                              MEMBER-I                                      PRESIDENT