DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 21^st day of December, 2023

                             Filed on: 07/07/2018

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                          President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                              Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                             Member

C.C. NO. 282/2018

COMPLAINANT

1. Arun G Nair, S/o. Gopalakrishnan, Veliyath House, V 257B, Alangad P.O.
2. Sruthi Satheesh, D/o. K.G. Satheeth, Kazhamathil House, X 456, Neduvannoor, Chowara P.O., Aluva 683571.

(Rep. by Adv. Aswathy Chandran, Alackal House, Vembilly P.O., 683565)

VS

The opposite parties

1. Jacob, Matrimony Photography, 4^th Floor, Jose Anexure Building, Jose Junction, MG Road, Kochi 682016.
2. Matrimony.com.Ltd., Regd. Office and Corporate Office No. 94, TVH Beliclaa Towers, 10^th Floor, Tower 2, MRC Nagar, Chennai 600028.

F I N A LO R D E R

D.B.Binu, President:

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complaint has been filed under Section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. This complaint was filed by a husband and wife against a matrimony photography company and its manager cum photographer in Kochi. The complainants' wedding took place in April 2017, and they agreed with the photography company to capture their wedding events, including videography and photography of the bride and groom, along with other packages. They paid an advance of Rs. 1000, and the remaining balance was paid later. However, as of the complaint date, they had not received any of the promised photography or videography services.

The actions of the photography company amount to unfair trade practices and deficiency in service. They trusted the company based on its reputation and advertising, considering their wedding a significant and sacred event. The complainants claim to have suffered severe mental distress, losses, and hardships due to the company's failure to deliver the services they paid for. They are seeking compensation and the cost of court proceedings to address their grievances.

2) Notice

The Commission sent notices to the opposite parties, which were acknowledged by them, but they did not file their versions. Therefore, they have been set as ex-parte.

3). Evidence

          The complainant submitted an ex-parte proof affidavit along with six documents, which were marked as Exhibits A-1 to A-6.

Exhibit A-1: Service Agreement

Exhibit A2: Payment Receipt

Exhibit A3: Additional Payment Receipt

Exhibit A4: Email Correspondence

Exhibit A5: Complaints Filed

Exhibit A6: Promotional Material of the Service Provider

4) The main points to be analysed in this case are as follows:

i)       Whether the complaint maintainable or not?

ii)      Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party to the complainant?

iii)     If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from the side of the opposite party?

iv)     Costs of the proceedings if any?

5)      The issues mentioned above are considered together and are        answered as follows:

In the present case in hand, as per Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986, a consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration that has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment.  Copy of Payment Receipts issued by the opposite parties. (Exhibit A-1 and A-2). Hence, the complainants are consumers as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Point No. i) goes against the opposite parties.

The complainants have filed a case seeking damages and compensation from the opposite parties for deficiency in service, unfair trade practices, and negligence. These allegations arise from the opposite parties' failure to fulfil their obligations, resulting in the stated grievances.

Ms. Aswathy Chandran, representing the complainants, has presented their case against a photography company accused of unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. The complainants provided proof affidavit and marked Exhibits A1 to A6 to support their claims. The core of the dispute lies in the alleged failure of the photography company to fulfil its contractual obligations for covering the complainants' wedding and wedding eve ceremony.

Key Points:

1. Agreement and Payment (Exhibit A1, A2, A3): The complainants and the photography company agreed (Exhibit A1) for the wedding services. The complainants made payments totaling Rs. 58,500 (Exhibits A2 and A3) and agreed to pay an additional Rs. 6,500 upon receiving the final album and video.
2. Non-Delivery of Services: Despite the agreement and payments, the complainants have not received the promised album, highlight video, and other deliverables. This non-delivery is alleged as unfair trade practice and deficiency of service.
3. Emotional Distress and Losses: The complainants express that the wedding, being a significant and sacred event, warranted reliable and high-quality service. The failure of the photography company to deliver as promised led to severe mental agony, loss, and hardship for the complainants.
4. Legal Remedies Sought: Due to the aforementioned reasons, the complainants are seeking compensation for the costs of court proceedings and other damages caused by the photography company's actions.

The evidence and arguments presented highlight the photography company's failure to fulfil its contract, causing emotional and financial distress to the complainants. The court is requested to consider the facts and evidence to grant the relief sought by the complainants in their consumer complaint.

In essence, the complainants argue that the photography company's breach of agreement has resulted in significant emotional distress and financial losses, and they seek appropriate legal remedies for their grievances. The evidence presented included an ex-parte proof affidavit filed by the complainant, and it was unchallenged by the opposite parties. Therefore, the complainant's claims were considered credible and supported by the evidence. Therefore, the complainant requests the commission to grant the relief sought, including compensation for mental agony and unfair trade practices.

The opposite parties’ conscious failure to file their written versions in spite of having received the Commission’s notice to that effect amounts to an admission of the allegations levelled against them.  Here, the case of the complainant stands unchallenged by the opposite party.  We have no reason to disbelieve the words of the complainant as against the opposite parties. The Hon’ble National Commission held a similar stance in its order dated 2017 (4) CPR page 590 (NC).

The complainants, a husband and wife, have filed this complaint against a matrimony photography company and its manager cum photographer, alleging unfair trade practices, deficiency in service, and negligence. The complainants' wedding took place in April 2017, and they agreed with the photography company to provide photography and videography services for their wedding events. They paid an advance of Rs. 1000 and later paid the remaining balance. However, as of the complaint date, they had not received any of the promised services.

The main points to be analysed in this case are as follows:

i) Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?

As per Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, a consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration that has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. The complainants provided copies of Payment Receipts issued by the opposite parties (Exhibit A-1 and A-2), confirming their status as consumers. Therefore, the complaint is maintainable.

ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party to the complainant?

The complainants have alleged that the opposite parties engaged in unfair trade practices and deficient service by failing to fulfill their contractual obligations. This is evident from the Service Agreement (Exhibit A-1) and Payment Receipts (Exhibit A-2 and A-3), which establish that the complainants paid for the services in question. However, despite this agreement and payment, the opposite parties did not deliver the promised photography and videography services. This constitutes both a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.

iii) If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from the side of the opposite party?

The complainants have suffered emotional distress, loss, and hardship due to the failure of the opposite parties to provide the agreed-upon services for their wedding, a significant and sacred event in their lives. The evidence and arguments presented by the complainants highlight the breach of the agreement by the opposite parties, leading to mental agony and financial losses. Therefore, the complainants are entitled to relief.

iv) Costs of the proceedings, if any?

Given the circumstances of this case, the complainants are entitled to compensation for the mental distress and unfair trade practices they have endured. Additionally, they should be compensated for the costs of court proceedings incurred in pursuing this complaint.

In light of the above analysis and observations, it is evident that the complainants are entitled to a favorable judgment. The opposite parties' failure to file their written versions despite receiving notice constitutes an admission of the allegations against them.

The complainants placed their faith in the reputation and persuasive efforts of the opposite parties, holding the belief that a wedding, as a deeply sacred and significant event, should be captured and cherished forever. Given the opposite parties ' esteemed status, they seemed like the ideal choice for preserving these precious moments. However, the actions of the opposite parties led to profound mental distress, loss, and difficulties for the complainants. Consequently, the complainants rightfully deserve reimbursement for the legal expenses and the compensation they have requested, as a remedy for their emotional and financial hardships.

We conclude that issues number I to IV are resolved in favor of the complainant due to significant service deficiencies on the part and unfair trade practices of the opposite parties. As a result, the complainant has endured considerable inconvenience, mental distress, hardships, and financial loss stemming from the negligence of the opposite parties.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant.

Hence the prayer is partly allowed as follows:

1. The Opposite Parties shall refund the Complainants the sum of ₹58,500 (Fifty-Eight Thousand Five Hundred Rupees only) which was paid for the photographic services.
2. The Opposite Parties shall pay ₹50,000 (Fifty Thousand Rupees only) to the Complainants towards compensation for financial losses and mental suffering. The failure of the Opposite Parties to fulfil their agreement has caused the Complainants emotional distress and physical hardships, resulting from the deficient service and engagement in unfair trade practices of the Opposite Parties.
3. The Opposite Parties shall also pay the complainants the sum of ₹10,000/- (Ten Thousand Rupees only) towards the cost of the proceedings.

The Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable to fulfil the aforementioned directives within 30 days of receiving this order. Should they fail to comply, the amounts specified in points (i) and (ii) will accrue interest at 9% per annum, calculated from the date of the complaint (07.07.2018) until the date of realization.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 21^st day of December, 2023

Sd/-                     

D.B.Binu, President

Sd/-  

V. Ramachandran, Member

Sd/-

Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

Forwarded/By Order

Assistant Registrar  

Appendix

Complainant’s Evidence

Exhibit A-1: Service Agreement

Exhibit A2: Payment Receipt

Exhibit A3: Additional Payment Receipt

Exhibit A4: Email Correspondence

Exhibit A5: Complaints Filed

Exhibit A6: Promotional Material of the Service Provider

Opposite party’s evidence

Nil

kp/

Despatch date:

By hand:                                                                 

by post:                                                                          C.C. No. 282/2018

                                                                        Order date:          21/12/202