Haryana

Kaithal

94/20

K.B Enterprise - Complainant(s)

Versus

M.G. Steel Furniture - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Hans Raj Verma

10 Dec 2021

ORDER

DCDRF
KAITHAL
 
Complaint Case No. 94/20
( Date of Filing : 25 Feb 2020 )
 
1. K.B Enterprise
Karnal Road Kaithal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M.G. Steel Furniture
New Delhi
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 10 Dec 2021
Final Order / Judgement

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL.

                                                  Complaint Case No.94/2020.

                                                  Date of institution:25.02.2020.

                                                  Date of decision:10.12.2021.

K.B.Enterprise through its partner Krishan Verma, S.C.O.1 & 7, Satguru Market, Opp. Sant Nirankari Bhawan , Karnal Road, Kaithal, Haryana-136027.

                                                                        …Complainant.

                        Versus

  1. M.G.Steel Furniture, Shop No.9486, Gali No.12, Multhani Danda, Paharganj, New Delhi-110055, M.No.98111-66401.
  2. M.G.Steel Furniture, Shop No.9486, Gali No.12, Multhani Danda, Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 through its Prop. And partner Ajay Kumar.
  3. Shiv Transport Company (Shiv Road Lines), Shop No.4119, Naya Bazar, Rui Mandi, Sadar Bazar, New Delhi-110006.

pposite parties.

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

CORAM:     SMT. NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT.

                SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.

                SH. SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA, MEMBER.

       

Present:     Sh. Hans Raj Verma, Advocate, for the complainant.   

                Ops exparte.

               

ORDER

NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

        Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

        To replace the defective chairs or refund the amount paid by the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% p.a.

        To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him.

        To pay Rs.21,000/- as counsel fee and litigation expenses.

                Or

         Any other relief to which this commission deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the complainant.        

                    In nutshell, the facts of present case are that on 28.07.2019 complainant had ordered 2 resolving chairs from the Ops No.1 & 2 and the price was quoted by Op No.2 @ Rs.3200/- per chair and Rs.6400/- for two chairs.  Complainant agreed to the amount quoted by Op No.2 and on 29.07.2019 complainant transferred the advance payment of Rs.125/- (Rs.126.18) vide TRTR/921020384090/29-7-2019 & Rs.6500/- (Rs.6501.77) vide TRTR/921020384209/29-7-2019 from the current account No.185711031013 of complainant of Dena Bank to the bank details 060 5000 10121 7225 PNB provided by Op No.2.  On 09.08.2019 complainant received confirmation from the Op No.3 that they will deliver the consignment today and the same was delivered to the complainant.  Complainant was utter shock after opening the consignment that the chairs are having several defects i.e. defected resolving chair, raxian cloth but committed leather cloth, stand base was committed to be of steel but iron stand base was sent and base is not stable, chairs raxian is torn from various sides, no free delivery as committed, manufacturing guarantee, one year guarantee card not received, branded chair committed by opp. No.1 & 2, very rough packaging, defect in power hydraulic shocker, 1 piece of power hydraulic shocker is missing @ 150+150 and 5 tyre of revolving chair missing @ 15/-=75 (M) Chairs without fitting.  After checking the chairs, complainant reported to the Op No.2 about the defects but the Op No.2 started giving excuses and started avoiding the calls.  Complainant also sent the photographs of defective chairs to the Ops No.2 & 3 but they did not redress the grievances of complainant.  So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of Ops.  Hence, this complaint.  

2.             Upon notice, the Ops did not appear and were proceeded against exparte vide order dt. 10.09.2021 of this commission. 

3.             Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C26 and thereafter, closed the evidence.     

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.             From the pleadings and evidence of the case, it is clear that the complainant had ordered 2 resolving chairs from, the Ops No.1 & 2 and the price was quoted by Op No.2 @ Rs.3200/- per chair and Rs.6400/- for two chairs.  Ld. Counsel for complainant contended that complainant agreed to the amount quoted by Op No.2 and on 29.07.2019 complainant transferred the advance payment of Rs.125/- (Rs.126.18) vide TRTR/921020384090/29-7-2019 & Rs.6500/- (Rs.6501.77) vide TRTR/921020384209/29-7-2019 from the current account No.185711031013 of complainant of Dena Bank to the bank details 060 5000 10121 7225 PNB provided by Op No.2 as is clear from the statement of account Annexure-C1.  Ld. Counsel for complainant contended that the chairs in question were having several defects as is evident from the photographs Annexure-C4 to Annexure-C14.  Complainant reported to the Op No.2 about the defects but the Ops did not redress the grievances of complainant.  The contention of complainant has gone unrebutted as the Ops instead of contested the case have preferred not to appear before this commission and accordingly, they were proceeded against exparte.  Thus, we have no reason to disbelieve the contention of complainant, which is duly supported by his affidavit and other supporting documents.  Facing with the situation, we are of the view that it is a fit case where directions can be given to Ops to replace the defective chairs in question with the new one or refund the price/cost of chairs.  OPs are also liable to compensate the complainant for mental agony and physical harassment caused to him alongwith litigation expenses. 

7.             Thus, in view of aforesaid discussion, the present complaint is allowed and Ops are directed in the following manner-

(i)             To replace the defective chairs with the new one of the same description or in alternative to refund the amount of Rs.6400/- i.e. price/cost of two chairs to the complainant.

(ii)            To pay Rs.5,000/- (Five Thousand) as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant including the litigation expenses to the complainant.

                The Ops are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions jointly and severally within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, they shall pay interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of Rs.6400/-, from the date of this order i.e. 10.12.2021 till its realization.  Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs, as permissible under the rules.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.     

Announced in open court:

Dt.:10.12.2021.   

                                                                (Neena Sandhu)

                                                                President.

 

       

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Suman Rana),          

Member.                            Member.

 

Typed by: Sanjay Kumar, S.G.       

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.