DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 239 of 27-05-2010<br /> Decided on : 24-06-2010 <br /> <br /> Vishwas Kumar S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal, House No. 69, Phase-II, Model Town, Bathinda. <br /> .... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> Manager, Vishal Mega Mart, Civil Lines, Guru Kashi Road, Near SBOP Civil Lines Branch, Bathinda.<br /> ..... Opposite party<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM <br /> <br /> Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh. Vishwas Kumar, complainant in person<br /> For the Opposite party : Exparte <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant alleged that he had purchased some goods from the opposite party on 26-04-2010 vide Invoice No. 3240000004251 worth Rs. 1016/- on cash payment. One item HH-CA Broom of Rs. 89/- was broken next day and ladies kurta was under size i.e. No. 38. When complainant approached opposite party to return these two items, the staff of the opposite party refused to return or refund the amount of broom as it has no guarantee and about ladies kurta, the opposite party handed over credit note of Rs. 149/-. The complainant requested them to take back kurta and return its price or to give him kurta of size No. 42. The opposite party wrote down that kurta of size No. 42 is not available with them and insisted the complainant to purchase other item of the same amount but the complainant refused as he did not want to purchase any un-necessary item. The complainant also sent a written complaint by registered post to the opposite party but they did not reply to this letter.<br /> 2. Despite service of notice, the opposite party has failed to appear before this Forum. Thus, exparte proceedings were taken against the opposite party. The complainant led exparte evidence.<br /> 3. Arguments heard. The complainant purchased 12 items from the opposite party. Item No. 4 which is ladies kurta worth Rs. 149/- was short in size and the broom purchased by him broke down very first day of its use. The complainant approached the opposite party who refused to return or change the broom. As size No. 42 of ladies kurta was not available, the opposite party gave credit note of Rs. 149/- which the complainant was not ready to accept. As he did not want to purchase anything from the opposite parties, so he requested for cash payment and for that, they showed the terms and conditions to him that they cannot refund the money. The terms and conditions Ex. C-9 are written at the back side of Invoice/bill. It is a common practice of these Marts that bills/invoices are supplied to the complainant/consumer after full payment of the articles purchased by him/her. No bill is issued before the payment. So, how it can be believed that a person who is buying things from such Marts could be aware of the terms and conditions before purchasing the articles, written at the back side of the bill which is issued after the payment of the purchased articles. The consumers pay the amount displayed on the computer screen and the bill is handed over after wards. Therefore, the terms and conditions written at the back side of the bill/invoice are never communicated to the buyers before and after the purchase of goods and are communicated after making payment of the articles, as has happened in the case of the complainant. Section 5 (1) of The Sale of Goods Act, 1930 clearly show the contract of sale how made, which is reproduced hereunder :-<br /> “5. Contract of sale how made (1) A contract of sale is made by an offer to buy or sell goods for a price and the acceptance of such offer. The contract may provide for the immediate delivery of the goods or immediate payment of the price or both, or for the delivery or payment by installments, or that the delivery or payment or both shall be postponed.”<br /> 4. As mentioned in the aforesaid section of Sale of Goods Act, it is very much clear that the sale of goods is a contract. Terms and conditions should be supplied to the buyer before payment of the amount and it should be agreed by both the parties equally. Hence, in the present case when the opposite party accepted the price in cash, it should not hesitate to return the money in cash. However, in no way he can force the complainant to buy anything else in lieu of his credit note. It is a consumer's choice/option whether he wants to buy anything in lieu of his credit not or wants to take the money back in cash. So the terms and conditions mentioned at the back of invoice/bill are not binding on the complainant. Regarding breakage of broom, this Forum is of the view that it depends upon the quality and price of product and the way how it was used. Thus, complainant is not entitled for relief in this context. <br /> 5. In view of what has been discussed above, this Forum is of the considered view that there is an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party who indulged the complainant in an unwanted litigation. Therefore, this complaint is partly accepted with Rs. 1,000/- as cost and compensation for mental harassment. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 149/- being the cost of ladies kurta to complainant after taking back the credit note in question.<br /> <br /> <br /> The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.<br /> Pronounced<br /> 24-06-2010 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Amarjeet Paul) Member