DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.714 of 2020

                                                Date of institution:  11.03.2020                                              Date of decision   :  26.10.2021

K.K. Aggarwal, aged 69 years, resident of # 1417, Sector 50-B, Chandigarh.

…….Complainant

Versus

Jain Crockery House, Shop No.38, Phase-10, SAS Nagar (Mohali).

                                                      ……..Opposite Party

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:   Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

                Ms. Gagandeep Gosal,  Member

Present:    Complainant in person.

                OP Ex-parte.

Order dictated by :-  Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

Order

               The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short), on the ground that the CC had purchased four chairs and paid an amount of Rs.2200/- in cash to the OP but the OP did not issue any receipt in lieu of cash payment. The allegation of the CC is that within 7 days of its purchase, one chair got cracked and collapsed and became unrepairable. The cracked and broken chair was immediately taken to the shop of the OP by the CC for replacement. It is alleged that the CC many times visited the shop of the OP for replacement of the chair, but the OP did not pay any heed to the requests of the CC. 

                Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought replacement of the chair. The CC has also   sought Rs.25,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses. Complaint of the CC is supported by affidavit of the CC.

2.             On 29.09.2021 one Shri Mohit Prop. of the OP had appeared but he did not file any reply. None appeared on behalf of the OP today.  Case is pending since long for seeking reply of the OP. Case called several times during the day. It appears that the OP is not interested to contest the claim of the complainant. OP is proceeded against ex-parte.  Arguments of the complainant heard.

3.             The OP has chosen to remain ex-parte and has not come forward to contest the claim of the CC. In that event we have no alternative except to believe the contents of the complaint and the allegations of the CC in toto.

4.             It is proved on file that the CC had purchased four chairs by paying an amount to the tune of Rs.2200/- to the OP in cash. It is also proved on file that the OP did not issue any receipt after receiving cash from the CC. It is also proved that one chair developed cracks and got collapsed and became un-repairable. It is also the specific allegation of the CC that the OP did not replace the chair with the new one as and when the CC visited the shop of the OP and every time the requests of the CC had fallen on deaf ears.

5.             The complaint of the CC appears to be genuine, cogent, reliable and trustworthy and the same is accordingly allowed. The OP is directed to replace the defective chair of the CC.  The OP is further ordered to pay a lump sum amount to the tune of Rs.1,000/- (Rs. One Thousand only) to the CC towards compensation for harassment, mental agony and litigation cost. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copies of the order.   Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties.   File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced

October 26, 2021

                                                                (Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)

                                                                President

                                                       I agree.

(Ms. Gagandeep Gosal)

Member