BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 05^thDAY OF OCTOBER 2024

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

Prayer

1. Direct the OP No.1, No.2 and No.3 to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of this  complaint till  realization for creating panic and threatening complainant by charging amount for weight printed on label  instead of actual gold weight displayed on opposite parties weighing machine, for cheating complainant by giving wrong information and concealing the information  in OPs bruiser with mala fide intention  and charging gold rate applicable on the date of redemption instead of gold rate applicable on the date of payment of last installment for crediting bonus gold and for providing incorrect Tax invoice with wrong quantity of bangles and wrong gold weight of bangles.

OPs will continue to cheatmore customer as OP need to pay less than 1% cheated money of all customer as few consumer approaches consumer court and get justice. Hence, prays Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to consider that compensation amount need to be based on the size of the company and amount of profit OPs are making by cheating all customers. Compensation amount shall prevent OP from making profit by cheating customer even after paying compensation to customer who goes to consumer court to get justice. Hence, Prays Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to provide compensation amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.

2. Direct the OP No.1, No.2 and NO.3 to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards delay, mental agony and cost of this proceedings.
3. Pass any such order or diction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

The complainant submits that on 15^th October 2022, to purchase gold to his mother in law he has subscribed to Dhanu Flexi Yo Flexi  gold jewels scheme at Lalithaa Jewellery Mart (P) Ltd Mangalore branch and paid first installment of Rs.10,000/-.

3.LalithaaJewellers Store Manager, Mangalore branch informed the complainant that the complainant will have to pay 11 installments and after paying 11^th installment, LalithaaJewellers will immediately credit 50% (Rs.5000/-) extra bonus gold on last installment with rate applicable on the day of payment of last installment the staff had also confirmed that the said scheme can be redeemed in any other branch of Lalithaa Mart Pvt Ltd, in credit. The complainant paid the installment and made the payment of 11^th installment of Rs.10,000/- on 4^th October 2023, after paying 11^th installment to Lalithaa Jewellery Mart (P) Ltd., Mangalore branch (OP), the OP did not credit 50% extra bonus on the last installment with rate applicable on the date of payment of the said installment. The complainant on enquiring the reason for non-credit of 50% bonus gold with rate applicable on the date of last installment, the OP informed that it will not reflect in customer ledger statement and bonus gold amount will reflect in final invoice.

4. The complainant on 29^th October 2023 visited Lalithaa Jewellery Mart (P) Ltd., Malleshwaram branch for redemption of gold. The store EDP staff of Malleshwaram branch informed that 50% bonus gold on last installment will be credit based on gold rate applicable on the day of redemption and company gold rate applicable on day of last payment. The complainant explained to them that while subscribing for the scheme. OP had promised that the bonus gold will be credited immediately after payment of last installment with gold rate applicable on the day of last payment of installment. The complainant also showed the terms and conditions of the Lalithaa Jewellery Mart (P) Ltd., Malleshwaram branch, page No.6 and para No.2 where it is mentioned in the bruiser of the scheme that “Members will be eligible for 50% bonus on 1 month installment on completion of 11 months installment payment that is 330 days from the date of joining.”

5. After showing bruiser to OP, the staff of OP told that as per the direction of Lalithaa Jewellery Mart (P) Ltd., rate of gold either redemption date or last installment date or any other date will be selected on bonus gold and that OP have intentionally not mentioned in the bruiser about the selection of date of applicable rate on bonus gold. On the day of last installment gold rate was Rs.5,260/- and the last installment was Rs.10,000/-. Complainant raising 1.901 grams for the last installment. Complainant should have received 50% of 1.901 grams as additional bonus gold which is 0.9505 gram. Hence total gold of 2.8515 gram (1.901+0.9505) should have been credited immediately. After the payment of last installment. However OP had given credit of 0.871 gram as bonus amount at gold rate of Rs.5,740/- applied on redemption day that is 29^th October 2023 to cheat their customer of Rs.480/-. Further complainant submits that he purchased only 2 bangles. One bangle with weight of 17.66 grams and another weighing 17.864 grams but the OP have given incorrect invoice. It is mentioned 3 gold bangles with first one bangle weighing 3.981 grams 2^nd gold bangle weighing 17.864 gram and 3^rd bangle weighing 13.665 grams. On questioning the OP about the wrong entry of quantity in the invoice to issue the correct invoice, the OP refuse to give the correct invoice. The complainant purchased total of 35.492 grams, redeemed 20.974 grams of cheat fund gold +0.8710 grams bonus given by OP +13.647 grams  purchased using credit card dated 29 October 2023 at a gold rate of Rs.5,740/-. The OP cheated the customers by giving wrong information and concealing any information in their bruiser malafide intention. OP is changing interpreting its terms and conditions orally and making profit by selecting gold rate as per their wish and not mentioning date of applicable gold rate on bonus gold. Hence this complaint by the complainant.

6. On issueof notice to OPs, OP3 represents through Vakalath and file It’s version OP 1 and 2 adopt the version filed by OP3.

7. In the version of OPs the OPs do not admit, to any of the aforementioned set out in the complaint. The OPs submit that it is true that the complainant subscribed to the scheme namely Dhanu Flexi YO gold jewel scheme at OP branch. All the details about the scheme has been printed in the advertisement brochure as well as in application. The complainant had joined this scheme and signed in the application form only after reading all the terms and conditions. It is admitted fact that 50% extra bonus in the last month installment will be given till the purchase of the jewels. OP admitted to the fact that bonus amount will be credited in gold grams based on dates prevailing at the date of redemption. OP denied that the staff of OP3 informed that the bonus jewel will be credited based on date of last payment. OP3 had clearly explained the terms and conditions of the scheme and had informed that the bonus jewels value will be fixed. At the time of purchase of jewels and it will reflect in the final invoice. OPs admit that on 29/10/2023 complainant visited OP2 branch for getting the jewels as per schemes and OP2 staff informed the complainant that the bonus gold value will be fixed on the date of purchase of gold under the scheme and he has clearly explained the terms and conditions of the scheme to complainant, after getting satisfied with the reply given by the staff complainant has purchased jewels. The complainant misconstrued the terms and conditions of the scheme and has averred misleading statements though terms and conditions are clearly mentioned in the brochure as well as in the application form. OP2 and OP3 branch clearly explained terms and conditions as stated above and convinced by their reply the complainant bought Jewellery. The OPs deny that they have not intentionally stated the above date of applicability on the bonus value of jewels. The complainant got the Jewellery without making any objection at the time of purchase. Hence there is no paying the difference amount of Rs.480/-. OPs states that they have given correct invoice to the complainant paid by the complainant. Complainant never make such claim at the time of purchase of gold. It is imaginary story narrated by the complainant for no reason. There is no necessity forthe OP to issue incorrect invoice. The OPs have acted as per terms and conditions of the scheme and never changed the terms and conditions for getting profit as alleged in the complaint. The complainant has nowhere stated how he got effected and why OPs supposed to compensate as claimed in the complaint. The complainant voluntarily join scheme having agreed the signed application form, on seeing the advertisements of OPs. Therefore there is no cheating as alleged by the complainant and there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service by OPs. The OPs have not gone back on the promise given under the scheme. There is no monitory loss and therecannot be any mental agony to the complainant since there is no monitory loss. Documents filed by the complainant established that the claim of complainant is false. The present complaint is afterthought the complainant took after the,Jewellery purchase, without any protest. On purchase of gold OP2 and OP3 have clearly explained about the scheme and showed terms and conditions to the complainant who convinced the complainant to purchase the jewels. Every customer who visits the shop of OPs is satisfied with the product.

8. Jewels of the OPs and the customers are also satisfied with value addition fixed by OPs, they are more satisfied after comparing the price with other shops, OPs submit that there is no deficiency in service rendered by them and the complainant claim of jewel and compensation is vicsocious and liable to be rejected and dismissed with cost.

9. The complainant filed their affidavit evidence along with 8 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. The OPs file their affidavit evidence along with 1document marked as Ex.R1. Complainant and OPs files their written arguments. Both complainant and OPs counsel submit oral arguments.

10. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency of service on the part of OP?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

11. Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

                        Point No.1:- Affirmative.

                        Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

                        Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

12.Point No.1 and 2: These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

13. On perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant Ex.P2 is an invoice copy issued by OPs dated 29/10/2023. The said invoice description shows 3 itemsi.e, 3 bangles weighing 3.981 grams, 17.864 grams and 13.665 grams, in total of 35.510 grams for an amount of Rs.1,15,000/-. We observe that the number and name written on the left hand side of the invoice copy as (No.21977Ramesha M. P) Ex.P3 is a copy of payment of installment made towards Dhanu Flexi Yo Flexi gold scheme. Ex.P4 is a copy of images of the gold bangles, Ex.P5 is a copy of calculation sheet provided by the OPs at the time of purchase.The above said calculation sheet clearly shows 2 bangles weighing 17.646 and 17.864 each, we also observe the ID No.21977 mentioned above on the left hand side of the said slip. Ex.P6 is revised calculation sheet provided by OPs. On observing the said revised sheet we see that there is an estimation made for 2 bangles weighing 17.646 grams and 17.864 grams each. We also observe the ID No.21977 on left hand side of the said sheet. Ex.P7 is an estimation sheet provided by OP dated 29/10/2023. In the said sheet we observe that the estimation is being given for 2 products weighing 17.646 and 17.864 which totally sum up to 35.510 grams at a cost of Rs.2,44,564.06/-. We also observe in the said estimation sheet the employee No. 21977 is been mentioned. Looking into the above documents, all the calculation sheets shows 2 products weighing 17.646 and 17.864 with No. 21977 but in the invoice is copy issued by the OPs shows 3 products weighing 3.981, 17.864 and 13.665 with total 35.510 grams.Though the total weight of the said invoice copy and the estimated sheet shows as 35.510 grams there is difference in the number of products. We also observe that the employee ID in the estimation sheet and in the invoice copy is same that is 21.977. The same ID is also mentioned in the calculation sheets produced by the complainant as Ex.P5 andEx.P6. Lookinginto the above documents. On perusal, it clearly shows that the complainant has purchased 2 bangles weighing 35.510 grams but the OP has issued an invoice for 3 bangles weighing 35.510 grams. Though there is no difference in the weight of the gold purchased and the amount paid by the complainant towards OPs, there is difference in the number of products purchased.The complainant has purchased 2 bangles but the invoice is been issued for 3 bangles as mentioned in the complaint by the complainant. The OP has shown unfair trade practice by issuing wrong invoice to the complainant. On perusal of the document Ex.P1 submitted by the complainant, which is the scheme bruiser of Lalitha Jewellery as Flexi O Flexi 11 month Jewellery purchase plan, in the terms and conditions point 2 mentions as

 “2. Members will be eligible for 50% bonus on 1 month installment upon completion of 11 month installment payments that is 330 days from the date of joining”.

In the above said terms and conditions the OP fails to mention the date of applicable gold rate of bonus gold. OP fails to guide and mention his customers / consumers that the extra 50% bonus on the last installment will be applicable on the date of payment of the said installment or the date of last installment. OP by misleading the customers / consumers has shown unfair trade practice. The consumers have the right to information and it is the duty of the manufacturer or seller to provide right information and guidelines to their consumers. The OP here as played unfair trade by misleading its consumers.

14. The OP has filed document in their contention but fail to prove that the complainant has purchased 3 bangles from them. The OP has also failed to provide proper guidelines to its consumers. Hence shown unfair trade practice & deficiency in service. Therefore OP is liable to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and Rs.10,000/- litigation charges.

Order

1. 1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, in hereby allowed in part.
2. It is jointly severally directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- with an interest of 8% per annum. From the date 29/10/2023 till realization.
3. OPs is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards litigation charges.
4. OPs are directed to pay the entire award amount within 45 days from the date of order, failing which shall pay an interest of 10% per annum till realization.
5. Furnish the copies of the order to both parties with no cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 05^th OCTOBER. 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;