DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM : NORTH-WEST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

   CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.

CC No: 292/2014

D.No._________                                                               Dated: ___________

In the matter of:

BHARTENDU GUPTA S/o LATE SH. JASWANT RAI GUPTA,

R/o 67, KAMDHENU APARTMENT

SECTOR-9, ROHINI,

DELHI-110085.                                                                   … COMPLAINANT

                Versus

SH. MANISH, SH. MITTAL,

M/s NARAYANI,

PU8, BASEMENT, (OPP. HDFC BANK),

PITAM PURA, DELHI-110034. 

011-42878485, 9910669955                                                 … OPPOSITE PARTY

CORAM : SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

                SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER

      MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER  

                                                                    Date of Institution: 05.03.2014

                                                                            Date of decision: 10.02.2017

MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER

ORDER

1.       Complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the marriage of complainant’s elder daughter named Kalindika was fixed for 17.02.2014 and for that occasion complainant alongwith his family members went  to the shop of OP on 17.12.2013 for the stitching  of marriage dresses for his younger daughter named Adhishree. After consultations and negotiations complainant placed an order for preparation of one A-line suit for Adhishree for Rs.18,000/- which included cost of fabric, stitching charges and ornamental work and advance of Rs.3,000/- was given to the OP (Sh. Manish) by the complainant and delivery of the suit was fixed as 04.01.2014. On 04.01.2014, Sh. Manish told the complainant on phone to come on 05.01.2014. The complainant alongwith his family members and one blouse piece of Kalindika went to the shop of the OP on 05.01.2014 and trial of only suit was done and stitching charges of blouse was fixed at Rs.650/-. On demand of OP, the complainant paid further advance money of Rs.5,000/- for stitching of the suit. On 07/08 January-2014, the complainant collected the stitched blouse of Kalindika from OP and paid amount of Rs.650/- as stitching charges. The complainant alongwith his family members again went to shop of OP on 12.01.2014 for trial of suit Adhishree but the suit was not stitched and the OP asked the complainant to visit after few days. But the OP did not stitch the suit despite visiting several times, with the result the complainant was forced to purchase a new suit piece on 05.02.2014 from “TacFab” and got stitched the suit in a hurried manner. After the marriage, OP failed to return the advance money of Rs.8,000/-.         

2.       On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for refund of advance money of Rs.8,000/-, cost of another suit piece of Rs.4,360/-, stitching charges of Rs.850/- and for compensation of Rs.10,000/- for causing him mental agony and harassment.

3.       OP has been proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 22.12.2014 as none on behalf of OP appeared despite service of notice on 12.03.2014 as per track report.

4.       In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also placed on record copy of cash memo dated 17.12.2013 issued by the OP thereby fixing cost of the suit as Rs.18,000/- and receiving advance money of Rs.3,000/-, copy of advance receipt of Rs.5,000/- on 05.01.2014 and fixing delivery date of the suit on 12.01.2014 and that of blouse on 07.01.2014. The complainant also placed on record copy of invoice dated 05.02.2014 issued by “TACFAB” for the purchase of suit piece for Rs.4,360/-.

5.      This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the complainant. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover, it appears that even after receiving summons of this case from this forum, the OP has kept mum and has not bothered to answer the case of the complainant. Accordingly the OP is held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. However, the complainant is not held entitled for the cost price of the new suit which was purchased from M/s TACFAB.

 6.      Accordingly, the OP is directed as under:

1. To pay an amount of Rs.8,000/- as advance money received.
2. To pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- as compensation including litigation cost towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant.

7.     The above amount shall be paid by the OP to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which OP shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment.  If OP fails to comply the order within 30 days, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 8.      Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on this 10^th February, 2017.

  BARIQ AHMED                            USHA KHANNA                           M.K. GUPTA

    (MEMBER)                                    (MEMBER)                                (PRESIDENT)