Delhi

North

CC/93/2023

RAZIQA HUSSAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

HAIR PALACE LONDON - Opp.Party(s)

26 Jul 2023

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

CC NO.93/2023

In the matter of

Raziqa Hussain                                                    

1737, Houz Sui Walan, Daryaganj

Delhi-110002                                                                         …Complainant

Versus

Hair Palace London       

Through its Proprietor

11/15, Block-11, East Patel Nagar,

Patel Nagar, Delhi-110008                                                    ...Opposite Party

 

ORDER
26/07/2023

 

Ms.Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member

1. The present complaint has been filed by Ms. Raziqa Hussain, the complainant against, Hair Palace London with the allegations of deficiency in services and unfair trade practices. Initially, the complainant had filed a complaint bearing CC No.16/2021, before this Commission wherein the complaint was dismissed in default vide order dated 04/01/2023. The complainant has filed application for condonation of delay in filing of the present complaint. The said application is disposed off as allowed and the delay is condoned for the reasons explained.
2. Facts as per complaint are that, the complainant had availed the services of OP for Hair, Nail and Eyelash extension on 09/10/2020.  The complainant paid Rs.32,900/- vide invoice No.000426.  It has been alleged by the complainant that the quality of products used by the OP were inferior which resulted in rashes on her eyes. Further, the hair extensions were visible and also damaged the quality of her original hair. 
3. The complainant was assured that the extensions would last up to two to three years.  The complainant approached OP complaining about the quality of services where the OP not only misbehaved but threatened the complainant with dire consequences.  The request of the complainant for refund was also declined by OP.  
4. A Legal notice was served upon OP on 25/02/2020 (sic), though the Legal notice is dated 24/10/2020, demanding refund of the amount paid for services which was neither replied nor complied with.  Hence, the present complaint with the prayer for directions to OP to refund Rs.32,900/- along with interest @18% p.a. from the date of payment till realisation; compensation of   Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental harassment and cost of litigation of Rs.15,000/-.        
5. The complainant has annexed the Legal notice dated 24/10/2020, Copy of the invoice of Rs.32,900/- and statement  of account reflecting the payment made to OP along with photographs, the order dated 31/03/2023 in                        CC No.1650/2021 of this Commission wherein the complaint was dismissed in default. 
6. The notice of the present complaint was served upon OP, however, none appeared despite service hence they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 30/06/2023. 
7. The complainant has filed ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit and has reiterated the averments made in the complaint, she has relied upon the documents annexed with the complaint and has got them exhibited. The invoice bearing no. 000426 is Ex.CW-1/A,B, the photographs as        Ex.CW-1/C-1,2,  Legal notice dated 24/10/2020 as Ex.CW-1/B-1,2.
8. We have heard the submissions made by the complainant, who is appearing in person and have perused the material placed on record.  The complainant has alleged that the services provided by OP were not only imperfect but the material used by the OP was of inferior quality.
9. Firstly deciding on the maintainability of the present complaint. It has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Indian Machinery Co. v. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., [(2016) 3 SCC 689], the fact that the case was not decided on merits and was dismissed in default of non-appearance of the complainant cannot be overlooked and, therefore, it would be permissible to file a second complaint explaining why the earlier complaint could not be pursued and was dismissed in default. Thus, in the light of the above judgement, the complainant can file the instant complaint.
10. We have gone through the photographs annexed with the complaint                 (Ex.CW-1/C-1, 2) as per which the hair extensions as well as the eyelash extensions had come off within a week of availing service. Further, the complainant has also placed on record the certificate issued by the doctor stating that, the complainant had to undergo treatment for burning eyes and watering of both eyes due to some cosmetic procedure done on the complainant from 10^th October 2020, which supports the allegation of the complainant that the quality of glue used by OP was bad which resulted in damaging her eyes and original eyelashes.
11. The complainant has also alleged that upon her visits to the OP for rectification of the hair extensions, the staff of the OP not only misbehaved but threatened the complainant and refused to remove the defects in the services provided. As, the OP has been proceeded ex-parte the allegations made by the complainant have remained un-rebutted and there is no ground to disbelieve the complainant. The complainant has successfully proved the allegations of deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of OP .
12. The complainant had availed the nail extension services as well, but has not alleged anything with respect to the quality of the nail extensions. On enquiry, the complainant informed that she was charged a lump sum of Rs. 32,900/- for all the three services and she will be unable to give the breakup for the cost of nail extensions. Presuming that the complainant was charged            Rs. 2,000/- for the nail extensions as per the prevalent market rate of the nail extension service, we come to the conclusion that the complainant had paid Rs. 30,900/- for availing hair extensions and eyelash extension services.
13. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present complaint, we direct OP to refund Rs. 30,900/- along with interest at the rate of 7 % p.a. from the date of payment i.e. 09/10/2020 till realisation. We further award compensation of Rs. 10,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment, inclusive of litigation expenses.

The order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, in case of non-compliance Rs. 40,900/- (Rs. 30,900/- + Rs.10,000/-) shall carry interest @9% p.a. from the date of order till realization .

Office is directed to supply the copy of this order to the parties as per rules.  Order be also uploaded on the website.  Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

(Harpreet Kaur Charya) Member

(Ashwanii Kumar Mehta) Member

 

 

( Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)

President