Complainant Jagtar Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to   change his mattresses. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as future interest as compensation alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he had purchased 4 pieces of Mattresses of Modi (Sunny) make from opposite party no.1 on 22.2.2008 for Rs.6400/- alongwith other things vide bill No.285 dated 22.2.2008. Mattresses were having guarantee of 15 years. These mattresses were purchased by him from opposite party no.1 got damaged due to its poor quality on 29.3.2019. He approached opposite party no.1 and told that since these mattresses have been damaged and it has given guarantee of 15 years. So opposite party no.1 was requested to change these mattresses, but all in vain.  A legal notice dated 2.5.2019  was sent to the opposite party no.1 which was duly received by opposite party no.1 but opposite party no.1 did not reply to the abovesaid legal notice nor he changed the mattresses till today. The act and conduct of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence, this complaint.

 3.          Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party no.1 appeared through its counsel and filed written reply taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is legally not maintainable and the present complaint is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has not approached this Ld. Commission with clean hands and has concealed the material facts from this Ld. Commission. On merits, it was submitted the opposite party has not given any type of guarantee to the complainant. The guarantee is always given by the manufacturer/company by issuing of valid document. The complainant had fabricated the bill and has also failed to submit any warranty/guarantee card alongwith the complaint which is mandatory.  It was further submitted that the mattress was of high quality. The present complaint has been filed after almost 12 years from the purchase which clearly shows that the mattress was of high quality. Even otherwise if there is any defect in the same, the matter is  between the manufacturer and complainant to the satisfaction of the manufacturer that the mattress in question has not been destroyed by the act and conduct of the complainant and his family members etc. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.       Registered Cover of opposite party no.2 had not been received back as per report of Ahlmed.  Case called several times but none had appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2. Hence, opposite party no.2 was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.10.2019.

5.        Rejoinder to the written statement filed on behalf of complainant.

6.     Alongwith the complaint, complainant has filed his own affidavit alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3.

7.      Alongwith the written statement, opposite parties has filed affidavit of Sh. Joginder Pal son of Sh.Bihari Lal, India Handloom, Gurdaspur Ex.OP-1/1.

8.     Written arguments have been filed on behalf of opposite party no.1.

9.    We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsels for the parties; written arguments by both the parties and 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 purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

10.    Ex.C-1 is the photocopy of the Invoice, whereby the complainant purchased four pieces of mattresses for a sum of Rs.6400/- on 22.2.2008 from opposite party no.1, wherein the guarantee period is mentioned as 15 years. Ex.C-2 is the copy of the legal notice dated 2.5.2019.

11.    It is an admitted fact by opposite party no.1 that the complainant had purchased the mattresses in dispute on 22.2.2008. But he has specifically denied the fact that he ever gave 15 years guarantee and also pointed out the complainant has fabricated the bill. Whereas, opposite party no.2 failed to appear and was thus proceeded against exparte.

12.      In the present case, though the complainant has alleged that the said mattresses got damaged in the month of March 2019 due to its poor quality but he has failed to produce on record any documentary evidence to prove that the same got damaged.  The complainant has also failed to produce any warranty/guarantee card on record. In the absence of any documentary evidence or any inspection report, it cannot be presumed that the mattresses got damaged. Otherwise also, the complainant had been using the product since last 11-12 years. Had it been of poor quality the same would have got damaged in the beginning.  Hence we find no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

13.     In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is observed that the complainant has failed to prove his case. Hence, the present complaint of the complainant is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

14.           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.

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

                (Kiranjit Kaur Arora)

                                                                                   President   

Announced:                                                   (Bhagwan Singh Matharu)

February 15, 2023                                                                 Member

*MK*