ROHIT filed a consumer case on 03 Feb 2017 against KRISHNA HAND LOOM in the East Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/125/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 28 Apr 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no. 125 / 2015
Date of Institution 18/03/2015
Order Reserved on 25/11/2016
Date of Order 09/12/2016
In matter of
Mr. Rohit Sharma, adult
HN 143 C, Pocket 1,
Mayur Vihar Phase 1
Delhi 110091……….………………………………..……………….……..…………….Complainant
Vs
M/s Krishana Handloom Emporium
C 16, Acharya Niketan
Mayur Vihar Phase 1, Delhi 110091……………………….………………………Opponent
Complainant’s Advocate ……………………………………Santosh Gupta
Opponent ……....…………………………………………………Ex Parte
Quorum Sh Sukhdev Singh President
Dr P N Tiwari Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari Member
Brief Facts of the case
Complainant purchased two Libra Ortho Plus mattresses for a sum of Rs 13790/ vide bill no WB 320 on dated 11/02/2012, annexed here as Ex. CW1/1 and mattresses serial code no 3503 and 3504 marked as Ex. CW1/1 a & b. Mattresses had guarantee against any manufactured defect.
Complainant noticed some problem in mattresses after 5-6 months of purchase as he was not feeling comfortable while sleeping, so contacted OP1 and OP2 and also made complaint to customer care no. , but did not get reply, Thereafter, complainant sent a letter of his own for replacement of mattresses, marked here as CW1/3 and legal notice to OPs for replacing the mattresses here annexed as Ex CW1/3a.
Not getting reply from OPs, this complaint was filed for replacement of two mattresses or refund of amount paid sum of Rs 13,790/- with compensation of Rs one lacs and litigation cost Rs one lacs.
Notices were served. OP did not put their appearance nor submitted written statement. After postal department tracking report that items were delivered, so case proceeded Ex Parte. Complainant filed his Ex Parte Evidence. Arguments were heard and order was reserved.
We have perused all the facts and evidences filed by complainant. It was evident that the said two mattresses were purchased from ‘OP’ shop, but cash bill does not have seller’s name and stamp. Though complainant has put OP name, but at no place, OP name or stamp was seen. Mattresses were manufactured by Libra mattresses and no where written having replacement guarantee. Guarantee card does not have seller’s name or stamp.
As stated in his complaint that middle portion of mattresses were giving trouble as he had some orthopedic problem. No such evidence was submitted on record to sustain his allegations. OP/manufacturer was not made necessary party to allege manufacturer defect.
We have opined that complainant had failed in proving deficiency in services of OP. So, this complaint is dismissed without cost to order.
The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the Record Room.
Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member (Dr) P N Tiwari Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.