DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 27^th  day of April 2024

                           Filed on: 09/10/2020

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                            President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                               Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                              Member

C.C. No. 297/2020

COMPLAINANT

Thazneem Althaf @Thasni Altaf, W/o.Althaf Mohammed, Thareparambil House, Manjali, mannam P.O., N.Paravoor, Ernakulam District, Pin-683 520

(by Adv.K.A.Hazan, V.J James, Fathima Jaleena, Mather Square, 6^th Floor, B-Block, Opp. North Railway Station, Kochi-18)

VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1. The Managing Director, Love Shore Home Nursing Security Service & Charitable Trust, VIP Panorama Arcade, Nedumbassery, Athani, Pin-683 585
2. Arifa Mohammed, C/o.Shiffana Tailoring & Fancy Shop and Home Nursing, Chungam, Aduvassery, Ernakulam District, Pin-683 578.

F I N A L   O R D E R

V.Ramachandran, Member

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complainant states that he had approached the opposite party seeking for getting the service of a home nurse and accordingly paid an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party.  The service of nurse was for the purpose of expected delivery of the complainant and for taking care of the baby.  The opposite party agreed to depute trained maid home nurse to take care of the complainant and her baby for a remuneration of Rs.3,000/- for 40 days.  The advance of Rs.5,000/- was paid on 31.07.2019 and the opposite party issued receipt for the same.

Thereafter on 17.08.2019 the complainant contacted the 2^nd opposite party for deputing the nurse.  But the 2^nd opposite party did not provide the service of nurse.  The service of the home nurse was not provided despite repeated frantic calls.  On persistent demand for the nursing aid, the 2^nd opposite party promised that the nursing aid would be provided within one week or else she would return the advance amount collected from the complainant.  Thereafter the opposite parties did not send any person for nursing aid and the complainant waited in vain.  The complainant was compelled to seek nursing aid elsewhere after paying unreasonable amount.  Thus the opposite parties did not keep their promise made with the complainant and caused much inconvenience and financial loss to the complainant.  Thus it was a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence the complainant demanded refund of the advance amount of Rs.5000/- paid to the 2^nd opposite party.  But the 2^nd opposite party did not return the advance amount.  The complainant tried many times to contact the 2^nd opposite party, she avoided attending the phone. When the complainant with her husband went to the office of the 2^nd opposite party on several times, she purposefully avoided the complainant and the opposite party shifted their office to a new address “Shiffana Tailoring & Fancy Shop and Home Nursing, Chugam, Aduvassery, Ernakulam Dist”.  The opposite parties were deliberately cheating the complainant.  As no nursing service was provided by the opposite parties, the complainant had to undergo many difficulties and inconvenience resulting in severe mental agony and financial loss.

2. Notice

Upon notice from this Commission, the opposite party appeared and filed their version.

3. Version of the opposite party.

In the version the opposite party accepted that he had received an amount of Rs.5000/- from the complainant as stated by the complainant. But the delivery of the complainant took place 10 days prior to the date fixed and informed to them.  The complainant informed the opposite party that the complainant do not want maid for the hospital purpose and required for domestic purpose only. The opposite party while contacted the complainant after discharge from the hospital the complainant informed the opposite party that they are not in need of a maid since they have selected someone else. The other details furnished by the opposite party are that she had paid an amount of Rs.1,000/- to the maid who was arranged for the complainant.

4. Evidence

The complainant produced 4 documents which are marked as Exbt.A1 to A4.

Exbt.A1 is the original receipt issued by the opposite party to the complainant in which it can be seen that an amount of Rs.5,000/- was remitted by the complainant to the opposite party. Exbt.A2 is the lawyer notice.  Exbt.A3 is an acknowledgment card.  Exbt.A4 is a copy of registered letter.

5)       The following are the main points to be analysed in this case:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite parties to the complainants?
2.  

(iii) Costs of the proceedings if any?

6)       Point No..(i)

          The complainant paid an amount of Rs.5000/- to the opposite party as per Exbt.A1 produced by the complainant.  Further, the opposite party had not provided the service of a maid to the complainant as promised.  Eventhough it is stated by the opposite party that she had arranged maid for sending to the complainant but had not proved before the Commission that such a maid was arranged by her for sending to the complainant. Above that eventhough version is filed by the opposite party, the opposite party had not further appeared before the Commission or participated for further procedure to defend the allegation of the complainant.  It can be seen that in the version itself that the opposite party was willing to pay back the amount of Rs.5,000/- collected from the complainant.  Hence point No. (i) is proved in favour of the complainant.  Considering all the above aspects the following orders are issued.  

O R D E R

1. The opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant. Considering the nature of the case, no compensation is granted.
2. Cost of Rs.2000/- shall also be granted.  All the amounts should be paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order .    If the order is not complied within 30 days the cost shall attract 5.25% per annum from the date of order till the date of realization.

      Pronounced in the Open Commission this 27^th day of April  2024.

                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                             V.Ramachandran, Member

                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                             D.B.Binu, President

                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                             Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

                                                                             Forwarded by Order

                                                                             Assistant Registrar

APPENDIX

Complainants’ Evidence

Exbt. A1-     is the original receipt issued by the opposite party to the complainant in which it can be seen that an amount of Rs.5,000/- was remitted by the complainant to the opposite party.

Exbt.A2       the lawyer notice

Exbt.A3 -     acknowledgment card

Exbt.A4       a copy of registered letter.  

Opposite party’s evidence :    Nil

Date of Despatch   :: By Hand   :: By Post

uk