BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 45/2007 Filed on 13.02.2007

Dated : 29.11.2008

Complainants:

1. Consumer Vigilence Centre, Sreekovil, Kodunganoor P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 013.

    

2. T. Radhamani Amma, Aiswarya, Padayani Road, Maruthankuzhi, Thiruvananthapuram – 30.

Opposite party:

M/s Maharaja Textiles & Hindusthan Home Appliances, Opp: S.M.V School, Overbridge, Thiruvananthapuram – 1.

This O.P having been heard on 03.11.2008, the Forum on 29.11.2008 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER

The 1^st complainant in this case is Consumer Vigilence Centre and 2^nd complainant is Radhamani. The opposite party is M/s Maharaja Textiles. The 2^nd complainant purchased a sari with blouse piece and

lining cloth worth Rs. 680/- from the opposite party’s shop. The stitching charge of the blouse is Rs. 100/-. the complainant wore the sari after two days from the date of purchase. When she reached at East Fort there was rainfall and due to that rain the sari got shrinked. The condition of the sari is still in shrinked stage. Thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party with said sari for the replacement. But the opposite party was in an adamant attitude. He was not ready to settle the case. Then the 2^nd complainant approached the 1^st complainant for their help. The 1^st complainant sent a

notice to the opposite party and requested to settle the matter. The opposite party received the notice, but not responded. Hence the complainants filed this complaint for the redressal of their grievances.

The opposite party remained ex-parte.

The complainant has been examined as PW1. From the complainant’s side 3 documents were marked.

Points to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the opposite party’s side?

2. Reliefs and costs.

Points (i) & (ii):- The complainants in this case produced 3 documents to prove their case. The documents produced by the complainants are marked as Exts. P1 to P3. Ext. P1 is the bill No. 67329 which shows that the complainant purchased the sari, blouse piece and lining cloth from the opposite party’s shop for Rs. 680/-. Ext. P2 is the returned acknowledgement card signed by the opposite party. Ext. P3 is the copy of notice issued by the 1^st complainant for and on behalf of the 2^nd complainant to

the opposite party. The complainant produced the disputed sari before this Forum which was marked as MO1. This forum perused the documents and the sari produced by the complainant carefully. Thus it is revealed that the sari is in a useless condition. The price of the sari is Rs. 617, but the quality of the sari is substandard one compared with the price of the sari. The opposite party has a responsibility to supply goods according to their value. The opposite party should have replaced the sari or refunded the price of the sari to the complainant when she approached them with the complaint. Considering the above facts and circumstances this Forum finds that the acts of the opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence this Forum allows the complaint.

In the result, the opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 617/- (Rupees six hundred and seventeen only) to the complainant as the price of the sari and shall also pay Rs. 500/-(Rupees five hundred only) as compensation and Rs. 1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) as costs of the proceedings. Time for compliance one month. Thereafter 9% interest per annum shall be paid to the above said amounts. And also this Forum direct the opposite party not to issue bills hereinafter carrying the condition “Goods once sold will not be taken back or exchanged”. This is violation of G.O. No. 60/07 FCS&CA dated 03.11.2007.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 29^th November 2008.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 45/2007

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS :

PW1 - T. Radhamani Amma

II COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Photocopy of cash bill No. 67329 dated 11.11.2006.

P2 - Original acknowledgement card.

P3 - Copy of letter dated 01.12.2006 addressed to the opposite

party.

III OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT

 complainant’s

 %

alert

%, <, >, =,  ; , #, ‘, “, alert