Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/259/2019

Pratima Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mrs. Shreya, Dietician Shreyas Family Diet Clinic - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

05 Feb 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	259 of 2019
Date  of  Institution	:	30.04.2019
Date   of   Decision	:	05.02.2020

 

 

 

 

Pratima Sharma w/o Dr.Keshav Sharma, Durga Cottage, Majitha House, Shiv Shakti Vihar, Chhota Shimla, Himachal Pradesh 171002

    2^nd Address:-

Pratima Sharma w/o Dr.Keshav Sharma, Principal, Govt. Sr.Secondary School, Kotkhai (Boys), Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

             …..Complainant

Versus

Mrs.Shreya, Dietician Shreyas’ Family Diet Clinic, SCO No.411-412, First Floor, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh.

    2^nd Address:-

H.No.2284, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh.  

   ….. Opposite Party 

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN        PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA    MEMBER

                                        

 

Argued by :-

Sh.Jitender Bansal, Adv. for the complainant.

Sh.Varun Bhardwaj, Adv. for OPs.

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

         Succinctly put, the complainant hired the service of OP ON 12.10.2018 FOR WEIGHT LOSSE through diet plan and as such paid Rs.36000/- & Rs.1000/- for consultation and registration fee respectively. Complainant also spent laboratory test charges approximately Rs.10,000/-.  It is averred that the OP promised to provide service to the complainant and agreed to give her daily dietary Whatsapp messages for which she was charged Rs.36,000/- for six months package.  It is submitted that the OP failed to give the diet charts, as agreed and thus failed to provide proper service to the complainant, despite several telephonic calls and visits. Ultimately, the complainant sought refund of the amount from the OP by sending notice dated 4.2.2019, but the OP did not make any refund and flatly refused to give service to the complainant.  It is also submitted that the OP had advised the complainant to drop the medicines that she was taking. It is stated that due to deficient service of OP, the complainant suffered mental agony, harassment and financial loss.  Hence, this complaint has been filed.  

 

2]       The OP has filed reply and admitted that the complainant hired its service for weight loss through diet plan on 12.10.2018 and paid Rs.37,000/-.  It is submitted that the complainant came to the clinic of OP on 12.10.2018 and decided to take a package for 6 months and maintenance for one month.  The OP informed her that they will charge a sum of Rs.75000/- but she showed her inability to pay the full amount in one go and requested the OP to make it a family package and thereafter, as a goodwill gesture, the OP gave a favour to the children of the complainant for a complimentary service ‘ON A CONDITION” that the service will be till 3^rd November, if the balance amount will not be paid, then the service will be given only to the complainant and not to her children & the children will get the benefit of the diet package only after receipt of full payment by OP.  It is submitted that the complainant started the diets from 13^th October, 2018 and that the first set of diets were from 13.10.2018 to 20.10.2018 and then 2^nd diet was from 20.10.2018 till 27.10.2018. It is stated that the complainant never called the OP, rather it was the representatives of the OP, who repeatedly requested the complainant either telephonically by way of sending WhatsApp messages for taking the proper dietary chart from time to time, but the complainant ignored the same.  It is pleaded that the amount paid by the complainant, as per company policy, is non-refundable. Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire record.

 

5]       The entire evidence placed on record by both the parties reveals that the complainant on 12.10.2018 has hired the services of the OP for weight loss through Diet Plan by paying an amount of Rs.36,000/- plus consultation fee of  Rs.1000/-.  It is a matter of record that the OP after having received a handsome amount of Rs.37,000/- send prescription of diet for few days only (as record cogently reveals) and thereafter, stopped sending the same to the complainant.  The correspondences exchanged between the parties reveals that the complainant having been annoyed by the deficient services of the OP, decided to discontinue with the package and thus claimed for refund of the paid amount.

 

6]       Contrarily, the OP claimed that the complainant has availed the Diet Plan Package amounting to Rs.75,000/- as a family package, whereas she paid only an amount of Rs.36,000/- as first installment and despite repeated reminders and calls, did not pay the balance amount, thus they discontinued delivering/sending diet chart/prescription to the complainant. 

 

7]       The whole gamut of facts corroborated by the documents on record reveals that the complainant being dis-satisfied with the services of the OP is now reluctant to continue further to retain service of OP.

 

8]       Record reveals that the OP averred wrongly that they started sending Diet prescription from the very next day i.e. from 13.10.2018 onwards as the complainant get her medical tests conducted on 14^th October, 2018 as required by the OP and duly send the reports on the same day. Thereafter, vide message dated 16.10.2018, the complainant complained to the OP that she had not been supplied with diet plan and thus asked for the refund (Ann.OP-2 Page-19). Ann.OP-2 (Page 20,21,22) reveals that it is only after the above said message to the OP, they send certain diet plans and that too for approximately 5 days only. No record showing that the OP sent two sets of diet plans to the complainant from 13.10.2018 to 20.10.2018 & 20.10.2018 till 27.10.2018 as pleaded, has been placed on record by the OP for the reasons best known to them.  But such absence of cogent evidence certainly raises a reasonable presumption in favour of the complainant that she has not been provided with the due services, thus rightly asked for the refund of the amount.  Record further reveals that after having availed the services of the OP on 12.10.2018, they immediately on the very next day i.e. on 13.10.2018 sent an email whereby the complainant was asked to pay the balance payment whereas the OP vide its reply claimed that the complainant was given complimentary service to provide diet chart to the kids of the complainant on a condition till 3^rd Nov., as complainant was supposed to pay the balance payment of the package.  

         It is observed that the OP failed to provide the due services to the complainant and thus, the complainant has rightly claimed for the refund.

 

9]       Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case and discussion, as aforesaid, we allow the present complaint with direction to the OP to refund the amount of Rs.36,000/- to the complainant along with litigation cost of Rs.5000/- within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which the OP shall also be liable to pay an additional compensatory amount of Rs.5000/-, apart from other relief. 

         Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced

5^th February, 2020                           

                                                                   Sd/-                      (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

         

 

Sd/-

                                                                    (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER