Punjab

Moga

CC/17/104

Pardeep Dhand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Jaidka Selections - Opp.Party(s)

Ajit Verma

06 Dec 2017

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

 

                                                                                      CC No. 104 of 2017

                                                                                      Instituted on: 30.10.2017

                                                                                      Decided on: 06.12.2017

 

Pardeep Dhand son of Sh.Harbans Lal son of Sh. Lal Chand, resident of House no.631, Mohalla Kishanpura Moga, Tehsil and District Moga.

                                                                                ……… Complainant

 

Versus

Jaidka Selections (Babe Di Hatti), Bagh Gali, Moga Tehsil and District Moga, through its Partners:-

1.       Lovish

2.       Ram Mohan

                                                                           ……….. Opposite Party

 

 

Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

Quorum:    Sh. Ajit Aggarwal,  President

                   Smt. Vinod Bala, Member

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

 

Present:       Sh. Ajit Verma, Advocate Cl. for complainant.

                   Opposite parties ex-parte.

 

 

ORDER :

(Per Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

 

1.                Complainant has filed the instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") against Jaidka Selections (Babe Di Hatti), Bagh Gali, Moga Tehsil and District Moga, through its Partners (hereinafter referred to as the opposite party) directing them to refund the amount of Rs.1680/- paid in cash for purchase of defective cloth item alongwith interest @ 2% per month from the date of purchase/submission of claim till actual realization. Further they may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- for unnecessary mental as well physical harassment  which includes Rs.1500/- of legal notice, Rs.5500/- counsel fee and Rs.1500/- as miscellaneous charges incurred by the complainant.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the case are that opposite party is carrying on its business of sale of Readymade Garments under the name and style of Jaidka Selections (Babe Di Hatti) Bagh Gali Moga and Mr. Lovish and Mr. Ram Mohan are its partners. The Jaidka Selections is being sued through its above said partners. On 27.09.2017 the complainant alongwith his minor daughter namely Sayesha visited the shop of opposite parties and purchased one suit for his daughter worth Rs.1680/- in cash vide invoice no.98 dated 27.09.2017. Opposite party assured that quality of the cloth and stitching etc. is upto mark. The suit purchased by complainant from the opposite party is defective one and was torn and there is a hole in it, so the complainant alongwith his daughter immediately approached the opposite parties and disclosed regarding the defects, but the opposite parties refused to hear him. When the complainant insisted for change of the said item, the opposite parties lost their tamper and used filthy language towards the complainant and his daughter, insulted him and his daughter in the presence of various customers and general public present there. The complainant was unnecessarily harassed by the opposite parties. The reputation of the complainant and his family was degraded in the eyes of general public, without any fault on their part. The loss of reputation cannot be counted in terms of money. The complainant approached to opposite parties a number of times for the return of the amount, but they put off the matter on one pretext of the other. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 7.10.2017 upon the opposite party, but to no avail. The abvoesaid acts of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and against principles of natural justice. Hence this complaint.

2.                Notice issued for the service of opposite parties duly served, but despite that none has appeared on behalf of opposite parties. As such, opposite parties were ordered to be proceeded ex-parte.  

3.                In order to prove the case, the complainant tendered in ex-parte evidence his duly sworn affidavit as Ex. C1 and copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence. 

4.                We have heard the complainant in person and have carefully gone through evidence on record.

5.                The case of the complainant is that opposite party is carrying on its business of sale of Readymade Garments under the name and style of Jaidka Selections (Babe Di Hatti) and Mr. Lovish and Mr. Ram Mohan are its partners. On 27.09.2017, the complainant purchased one suit for his daughter worth Rs.1680/- in cash vide invoice no.98 dated 27.09.2017. Opposite party assured that quality of the cloth and stitching etc. is upto mark. When the complainant went home, he came to know that the suit purchased by him from the opposite parties is defective one and is torn and there is a hole in it. The complainant immediately approached to opposite parties and disclosed regarding the said defect, but they refused to hear him. When the complainant insisted for change of the said item, the opposite parties used filthy language towards the complainant and insulted him in the presence of various customers and general public present there. The complainant was unnecessarily harassed by the opposite parties. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 7.10.2017 upon the opposite parties directing them to pay compensation on account of sale of defective item, use of filthy language, abusing them, but to no effect.  To prove his case, the complainant has produced on record his duly sworn affidavit as Ex.C-1, copy of the bill Ex.C-2, copy of legal notice Ex.C-3. From the perusal of copy of bill Ex.C-2, it is clear that the complainant purchased the suit in question on 27.09.2017 and from the perusal of legal notice, it is clear that opposite parties sold a defect suit to complainant, otherwise there is no need for complainant to issue legal notice and to spent an amount for the issuance of legal notice. Moreover, the evidence adduced by the complainant, in support of his case has gone un-rebutted on record as the opposite parties suffered ex-parte wilfully and thereby impliedly admitted the allegations made in the complaint.

8.                In view of the above discussion, the present complaint stands allowed ex-parte and opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.1680/- i.e. the price of suit alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from 27.09.2017 till realization. Further they are directed to pay Rs.5000/-(Five thousand only) as compensation on account of mental tension, harassment and agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.2000/-(Two thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under section 25 & 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties, free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated: 06.12.2017.

 

                               (Bhupinder Kaur)                   (Vinod Bala)        (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                     Member                              Member                  President