Tripura

StateCommission

A/20/2018

Dr. Sipra Ray - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, Himany Agency Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Biplabendu Roy

02 Jul 2018

ORDER

 

Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala.

 

Case No.A.20.2018

 

 

1. Dr. Sipra Ray,

D/o Late Sushil Chandra Ray,

Kumari Tilla, Qrt. Type No.21, 

Kumari Tilla, P.O. Kunjaban, 

Pin- 799 006, West Tripura.

… … … … … Appellant/Complainant.

 

Vs

 

 

1. The Manager,

Himani Agency Private Ltd. (Tanishq),

Mantribari Road, P.O. Agartala, Pin- 799001,

District - West Tripura.

 

2. The Manager, Tanishq Customer Care,

Titan Company Ltd.,

P.O. Box- No. 1721, Bangalore,

Karnataka, India.

… … … … … Respondent/Opposite Parties.

 

 

Present

Mr. Justice U.B. Saha,

President,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

Mr. Narayan Chandra Sharma,

Member,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

 

 

For the Appellant:                                          Mr. Biplabendu Roy, Adv.

For the Respondent No.1:                              Mr. Gautam Bhaumik,

Boutique Operation Specialist, Himani Agency Private Ltd. (Tanishq).

 

For the Respondent No. 2:                             Mr. Priyabrata Bhattacharjee,

Area Business Manager of Tanishq,

Titan Company Ltd.

Date of Hearing & Delivery of Judgment:     02.07.2018.

 

J U D G M E N T [O R A L]

 

U.B. Saha, J,

The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24.04.2018 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum), West Tripura, Agartala in Case No.C.C.125 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the learned District Forum dismissed the complaint petition filed by the appellant (hereinafter referred to as complainant).    

2. Heard Mr. Biplabendu Roy, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-complainant. Also heard Mr. Gautam Bhaumik, Boutique Operation Specialist appearing on behalf of the Himani Agency Private Ltd. (Tanishq) (hereinafter referred to as opposite party no.1) as well as Mr. Priyabrata Bhattacharjee, Area Business Manager of Tanishq, Titan Company Ltd. appearing on behalf of the Manager, Tanishq Customer Care (hereinafter referred to as opposite party no.2).
3. As agreed to by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the complainant and the authorized persons appearing on behalf of the opposite parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at the order stage itself.    
4. Brief facts needed to be discussed are as follows:-

Appellant-complainant, Dr. Sipra Ray purchased one set of bangles from the opposite party no.1, Himani Agency Pvt. Ltd. (Tanishq) on 29.04.2017 making payment of Rs.96,178/-, but after one week, the bangles became fade. So she requested the opposite party no.1 to replace the ornaments (bangles), but she was asked by the opposite party no.1, Manager, Himani Agency Pvt. Ltd. (Tanishq) to take up the matter with the customer care i.e. the opposite party no.2 at Bangalore. Accordingly, she sent a registered letter to the customer care. She also made many correspondences through e-mail. Upon receipt of the letter as well as e-mail she was asked by the opposite party no.2 to deposit the ornaments (bangles) in the nearest Tanishq Showroom at Agartala, but she did not deposit the ornaments in the nearest Tanishq Showroom as requested by the opposite party no.2. According to her, the opposite parties failed to do their proper service by replacing the bangles she purchased. So she filed a case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the learned District Forum for refund the price of the bangles amounting to Rs.96,178/- and to pay Rs.1 lac as compensation.

5. Opposite party no.2, filed written statement denying the claim of the complainant on the ground that she did not deposit the bangles either to the opposite party no.2 or to the nearest Tanishq Showroom. In his written statement, the opposite party no.2 specifically stated that in case of any manufacturing defect or damage detected in the bangles, then the same shall be repaired free of cost, but the complainant insisted on replacement even without handing over the bangles purchased by her to the nearest Tanishq Showroom. It is also stated that unless she deposits the bangles, the opposite parties is not in a position to undertake a quality check in its factory and this request was made to her by e-mail, but she refused to deposit the same. Thus, there was no deficiency of service either on the part of opposite party no.1 or opposite party no.2 as alleged by the complainant.
6. The learned District Forum after considering the evidence on record dismissed the complaint petition.
7. We have gone through the records of the learned District Forum. According to us, the learned District Forum did not commit any wrong while dismissing the complaint petition, particularly when the complainant neither appeared herself before the learned District Forum nor adduced any evidence in favour of her in the complaint petition. However, as at this stage, the Ld. Counsel of the complainant and the representative appears on behalf of the opposite parties agreed to settle the matter amicably as per the terms mentioned herein below:-

1. The complainant shall deposit the bangles to the nearest Tanishq Showroom i.e. the opposite party no.1 within seven days from the date of receipt of the judgment and upon receipt of the bangles, the opposite party no.1 shall send the same to the opposite party no.2 i.e. the Tanishq Customer Care, Titan Company Ltd. to ascertain first the alleged damage and thereafter to take decision regarding the repairing of the bangles. Opposite party no.2 shall inform the complainant how much time will take for repairing of the bangles and return the same to the complainant.

In view of the above, the complainant is directed to deposit the bangles to the opposite party no.1 within seven days from the date of receipt of this judgment and the opposite party no.1 shall send the same to the opposite party no.2 to ascertain the alleged damage and to repair the same as per terms agreed by the parties.   

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed with the modification as stated (supra).   

Send down the records to the learned District Forum, West Tripura, Agartala.

 

MEMBER State Commission Tripura

PRESIDENT State Commission Tripura