DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.100 of 16

                                           DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 16-05.2016

                                                     DATE OF ORDER: 06-01-2017

Sandeep Sheoran aged about 33 years son of Sh. Sumer Singh, resident of village Titani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.

            ……………Complainant.

VERSUS               

1. The Proprietor, Liberty Shoes Ltd., Retail Division 3 HBL, Opposite Chugh Hospital, Meham Road, Bhiwani.

1. The Head/Manager Liberty House, Liberty Road, Karnal.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -    Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.

  Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

Present:-   Complainant in person.

       Ops no. 1 & 2 exparte.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                    In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that on dated 07.03.2016 he had purchased shoes of liberty company amounting to Rs. 1270/-  from OP no. 1.  It is alleged that after 4-5 days from purchase the shoes have been damaged.  It is alleged that he visited many times to the showroom of OP no. 1 and requested to changed the damaged shows but to no avail.  He also got served a legal notice to the Ops but no reply was given by them.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the OPs he has to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, he has to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.

2.                 OPs no. 1 & 2 have failed to come present.  Hence they were  proceeded against exparte vide orders dated 14.07.2016 & 08.11.2016.

3.                 In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-3 alongwith supporting affidavit.

4.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the complainant in person.

5.                 The complainant reiterated the contents of his complaint.  He submitted that he has purchased the shoes in question from OP no. 1 and  manufactured by OP no. 2 for a sum of Rs. 1270/- vide bill Annexure C-1 on 07.03.2016.  After 4-5 days of the purchase of the shoes, the pasting of the sole of the shoes was broken.  The complainant visited the OP no. 1 several times and ultimately issued a legal notice dated 22.03.2016.  The shoes was within warranty period. 

6.                 We have perused the relevant record.  The complainant has produced the photo copy of bill Annexure C-1, legal notice dated 22.03.2016 Annexure C-2 and copy of postal receipts Annexure C-3.  The Ops did not bother to appear and contest the claim of the complainant.  In the absence of any material contrary to the pleadings of the complainant, we found force in the contention of the complainant.  We allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to pay Rs. 1500/- against the old defective shoes of the complainant.  The complainant is directed to deliver the old defective shoes to the OP no. 1 and the Ops are directed to pay Rs. 1500/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of delivery of the shoes. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated:.06-01-2017.                                                   (Rajesh Jindal),

                                                                                       President       

                                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

                    (Anamika Gupta)

                          Member