Haryana

Ambala

CC/22/2015

Preeti Gakhar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Metro Shoes Limited. - Opp.Party(s)

Sudhir Gakhar

13 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                     Complaint Case No.: 22 of 2015

          Date of Institution   : 27.01.2015

          Date of Decision  : 13.08.2015

Preeti Gakhar D/o Sh. Krishan Lal, resident of House No.541, Sonia Colony, Ambala City.

                                                                                                                                                        ……….Complainant

Versus

Metro Shoes Limited, Shop No.6, New Clothes Market, Near Aggarsain Chowk, Ambala City through its Proprietor/Franchise.

                                                                                       ……Opposite Party

Complaint under Section 12 of the  Consumer Protection Act.

CORAM:    SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                  

Present:       Sh. Sudhir Gakhar, Adv. for complainant.

                   Op exparte.

ORDER

                    Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) alleging therein that she purchased one pair of shoe bearing item No.31-5522-020 from the OP in a sum of Rs.1390/- in the first week of December,2014. As per complainant, OP assured that  the shoes are durable for a considerable time and no bill was issued by the OP on the premise that  billing is already on-line and complainant will get the SMS on his mobile phone. After three days, the shoes became defective as colour of it started  undermine from three parts and pasting of it also started detached  and thus the shoe was not wearable. Then the complainant approached the OP to replace the shoes but they did not pay any heed to the requests of complainant on the pretext that shoe has become defective due to her own fault, however, they can send the shoes to the company for repair but it is upon the company either to repair it or to replace the same by 07.01.2015.  In this regard, a receipt in token of collecting of shoes was issued by the Op. Thereafter, the complainant again contacted the OP but the shoes in question were returned in the deteriorated conditions as was given by the complainant to the OP. Thus the complainant has submitted that the OP has committed deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice with her and prayed for relief as per prayer clause of the complaint.

2.                Due notice was served upon the Op through registered post but he did not bother to appear before the Forum and hence he was  proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.03.2015.

3.                To prove his case, counsel for complainant has tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 (Repair Memo) and closed evidence on behalf of complainant.

4.                We have heard the counsel for complainant and perused the record.  Annexure C-1 which is Repair Memo for shoes in question issued by OP-Metro shoes bears on it name of complainant, shoe item number and its price as Rs.1390/-wherefrom it is established that the shoes in question were sold by the OP to the complainant and the shoes became defective which were to be delivered after repair/rectification by OP on 07.01.2015.  Further, as per clause No.3 of stipulations mentioned on the repair memo there was 90 days warranty for  pasting & stitching etc. of the shoes if sold by Metro Show Rooms.  But the Op failed to repair or replace the shoes rather they returned it back to the complainant as such; given by complainant to the Op which amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of Ops.

                   In view of facts discussed above, we have no hesitation in holding that the Op is not only deficient in providing proper services to the complainant rather committed unfair trade practice by not acting as per their warranty conditions.  Accordingly, we allow the present complaint and direct the Op to comply with the following directions within thirty days from the communication of this order:-

(a)       To refund a sum of Rs.1390/- to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. 17.12.2014, the date of defect in the shoes to till its realization.

(b)       To pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as compensation on account of harassment & mental agony etc. caused to complainant.

(c)       Also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as litigation expense.

 

                             Further the award in question/directions issued above must be complied with by the OPs  within the stipulated period failing which all the awarded amounts  shall further attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default. So, the complaint is decided in above terms. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

 Announced: 13/08/2015

 

 

                                                                                                    Sd/-

                                                                                            (A.K. SARDANA)

                                                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                                                     Sd/-                                                                                                                                                  (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                                       MEMBER