DATE OF FILING : 11/06/2014
DATE OF S/R : 14/07/2014
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30/12/2014
SRI BISWAJIT GHORAI
s/o lt. Noni Mohan Ghorai,
47, Nabanaritala 1st bye Lane,
P.O. Baksara, P.S. A.I.C. Bose, B. Garden
Dist Howrah 711 104
- Sri Raja Chatterjee
son of Sri Alok Chatterjee,
35/2, Baksara Road, P.O. Baksara P.S. Santragachi
Dist Howrah 711 104……………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
Versus-
1. Glory Furnishers Pvt. Ltd.
being the dealer of Godrej Neer 1st floor
62, New G.T. Road, Uttarpara,
Dist Hooghly 712 258
2. Godrej Company,
having Eastern Regional Office at
Plot no. 30 Block G.N. Sector V Salt Lake City
Kolkata 700 091………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
- The complainants, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) have prayed for a direction to be given upon the O.Ps. to replace / refund the EMI at the rate of Rs. 2,379/- for six installments of total amount Rs. 14,274/- as per complaint petition against purchasing a Godrej Wardrobe of Kreatrion Model and Rs. 20,000/- as compensation including litigation costs along with relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- The brief facts of the case is that the complainants went to the show room of o.p. no. 1 for purchasing a Godrej Wardrobe of total amount of Rs. 25,940/- against such advance Rs. 1,000/- was paid and balance amount to be paid in 8 equal EMIs at the rate of Rs. 2,379/-. The said purchase item was delivered on 29.11.2013 through delivery challan no. 4838 without proper fittings. The complainant no. 2 through his account as on 02.6.2014 as per record paid six EMIs at the rate of Rs. 2,379/- of total amount of Rs. 14,274/- to the o.ps. who subsequently replaced the said wardrobe on 29.08.2014 without keys and money receipt which reflects in the order sheet dated d01.9.2014 as peroral submission of the ld. advocate of the complainants. It is alleged by the complainants that o.ps. in spite of verbal assurance to supply the keys of the locker of the replaced wardrobe and supply the new replaced bill / money receipt but On the contrary did not take any positive step and their grievances are also remaining unadressed and unsolved. In spite of repeated requests made by the complainants for mitigate the grievances the o.ps. remained silent and did not bother to redress the problem. Finding no other alternative complainant filed this instant case praying for the aforesaid relief.
- Notices are served upon theo.ps. The S/R of o.p. no. 2 is received with a remark by the postal authority ‘refused’ which considered to be good services and the o.p. no. 1 appeared and promised to submit written version but ultimately failed. For the sake of natural justice,the case was heard ex parte.
- Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
- Whether the complainants are entitled to get any relief and compensation as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the complaint / petition and its annexures together with BNA submitted by the complainant and noted the contents therein.The complainant advanced Rs. 1,000/- against total purchase value of the wardrobe of Rs. 25,980/- where balance amount to be paid in eight E.M.Is. of Rs. 2,392/- for which the goods were delivered by the o.p. no. 1 on 20.11.2013. But subsequently noticed that the said purchased item was not as per standard / without fitting equipments. Several correspondences were made to recurvethe problem / damage and finally the o.p. no. 1replaced the damage wardrobe by a new one on 01-09-2014 without keys of the, locker and the bill ( money receipts ).The o.ps. have simply the spirit of value of money for which the complainant no 2 paid six installments through his bank in total of Rs. 14,274/-. The o.ps. neither appeared nor submit any written version and the complaint petition remains unchallenged and uncontroverted. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep promise which suddenly amounts to deficiency in service coupled with unfair trade practice on their part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period and we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant shall be allowed in part. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 331 of 2014 ( HDF 331 of 2014 ) be allowed as ex parte with costs against the o.ps.
The O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to fix the locker inside the wardrobe within 15 days from the date of this order along with money receipt, new bill of the replaced goods against dues.
The complainant no. 2 is also directed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 10,366/- ( Rs. 25,940 – Rs. 14,274 – Rs. 1,000/- ) as per agreement against confirming satisfactory operation of replaced goods with proper fittings from the complainant no. 1 within 7 days thereafter valid money receipt of the new bill.
That the o.ps. are further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant no. 2 within one month from the date of this order.
The complainants are at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( P. K. Chatterjee )
Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
