DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

                                Consumer Complaint No.  822 of 2016                                         Date of institution:  19.12.2016                                         Date of decision   :  26.09.2017

Sahib Singh son of late Hari Singh, resident of House No.2205/2, Sector 37-C, Chandigarh.

                             ……..Complainant

                                        Versus

Mani Readymade Garments, SCO No.50, Dev Shopping Complex (Near Sonu Sweets), Pabhat Road, Zirakpur (Mohali), Punjab.

                                                       ………. Opposite Party

Complaint under Sections 12 of

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum

Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President 

Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member

Present:    Complainant in person.

                None for the Opposite Party.

ORDER

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

                Complainant Sahib Singh has filed the present complaint against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.  The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.             The complainant had purchased a dark coffee colour shirt from the OP in the month of September, 2016 for Rs.690/-. The complainant sought the bill from the OP but the OP stated that there was no need of any bill and assured the complainant to compensate in case of any complaint of the cloth. The OP had guaranteed fast (pucca) colour for the shirt.  On wearing, a stitching fault had come to the notice as on     buttoning up the shirt, an open space between two buttons on the belly area always remained open and part of the belly remained naked which invited embarrassment to the wearer. The colour of the shirt left on first wash.  The complainant brought these facts to the notice of the OP and requested to replace the shirt with another but the OP flatly refused and started misbehaving with the complainant. The complainant then served notice dated 30.11.2016 for replacing the shirt but the OP did not respond. This act on the part of the OP is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint for giving directions to the OP to refund him Rs.690/- alongwith interest @ 18% from September, 2016 till payment;  to pay him Rs.10,000/- for harassment and mental agony Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.             The OP in the reply has admitted that the complainant purchased dark Coffee colour shirt from its shop. The OP is having shirts of range of Rs.645/- upon which it is giving discount of 20% to 25%. The OP does not have any shirt of price of Rs.690/-.  The OP has further pleaded that it issues the bill on demand. The OP has denied that the shirt in question has not been sold by it. Thus, the OP has sought dismissal of the complaint.

4.             In order to prove the case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and copy of notice Ex.C-1 and postal receipt Ex.C-2.  After filing of reply 07.04.2017, none appeared for the OP and ultimately the evidence of the OP was closed by order on 21.08.2017.

5.             The complainant has argued that the OP in its reply has admitted that the shirt was purchased from its shop.  The complainant has further submitted that he demanded the bill from the OP but the OP assured the complainant that if there would any defect in the shirt, the complainant would be compensated.  The complainant has thus submitted that his complaint may be allowed and he may be got refunded the price of the shirt and also awarded compensation for mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.

6.             After hearing the complainant and going through the pleadings, evidence and the written as well as oral submissions, we find that the complainant has failed to prove his case against the OP. The OP in the written statement has specifically denied that the shirt in question has been sold by it to the complainant. The OP has taken a stand that the price of the shirts being sold by it ranges upto Rs.645/- only and upon this price discount of 20% to 25% is given. It has been mentioned in Para No.5 of the written reply by the OP that it does not have any shirt of price of Rs.690/-.  The complainant has not produced the bill to prove that he has purchased the shirt. The complainant has taken a plea that the OP has not issued him the bill whereas the OP in the written statement has stated that it issues the bill on demand.  No prudent person would purchase an item without receipt of bill. The complainant appears to be an educated person as he himself served the notice Ex.C-1 to the OP; submitted the complaint and even submitted the written arguments in support of his complaint.  Thus it cannot be said that the complainant is an illiterate person.   The complainant has been failed to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.

7.             In view of our aforesaid discussion, the present complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs. .

                The arguments on the complaint were heard and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced

Dated: 26.09.2017

                                      (A.P.S.Rajput)
 President

(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)

Member