District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No.12/2022.

 Date of Institution:05.1.2022.

Date of Order: 13.02.2023.

Smt. Renu W/o Sh. Dharam Raj R/o H.No. 16, Hari Nagar, Bharat Colony, Sector-87, Faridabad.

                                                                   …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

M/s. Banga Interiors, Shop No.____ Main Road, Near Shivalaya Mandir, Block-C, NIT, Faridabad through its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Chirag Banga.

                                                                   …Opposite party……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana…………Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh. Pardeep Shandilya,  counsel for the complainant.

                             Opposite  parte exparte vide order dated 12.09.2022.

ORDER:  

INDIRA BHADANA, PRESIDING MEMBER:

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that   the complainant had wanted to purchase some furniture and fixture i.e. One Double Bed, Two Mattresses/Gadda and one book shell, hence, the complainant visited to the showroom of the opposite party on 04.04.2021 in the evening hours and opposite party had showed the above said items and assured the complainant that the said material was high quality material and assured the complainant that the same would not damage very soon and would run smoothly for a long period.  On believing the words of the opposite party, the complainant had purchased the above said material from the opposite party for a total sum of Rs.36,000/- out of which the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- through phone pay on the same date i.e.04.04.2021 at about 8.00 p.m. and paid the remaining amount of Rs.26,000/- in cash to the opposite party.  At the time of selling the above said material the opposite party did not handover the bill of the same to the complainant by taking the plea that at the time of delivery of the said items at the house/destination of the complainant delivery boy would handover the bill to the complainant as during the transportation of the said items officials of Tax Department as well as police officials checked the bills of the material.  On the same night at about 9.30 p.m. the said items were delivered by the opposite party to the complainant at her destination.  So, the complainant could not check the same at the time of taking the delivery of the said items.  At the time of taking the delivery of the said items when the complainant made the demand of bill of the above said material from delivery person then the said delivery person did not handover the bill to the complainant by taking the plea that bill book of the opposite party had finished and

he would handover the  bill of the complainant himself after some time.  On the very next day when the complainant checked the material, she got shocked and

surprised that which material was showed by the opposite party to the complainant the same material had not delivered to the complainant and the said material delivered by the opposite party to the complainant was very poor and low quality material as the opposite party had charged 6” mattresses from the complainant but he sent the mattresses of 4” to the complainant.  Book Shell which was showed to the complainant was having 04 portions but book shell which was delivered to the complainant was having only 03 partition and the same was defective from various places and quality of the said material was very low and double bed supplied by the opposite party was very low quality and was defective from various places.  Thereafter the complainant many times requested the opposite party to replace the  said defective and low quality material with high quality good material.  But the opposite party every time delay the matter on one pretext or the other.  Upon which the complainant raised the demand from the opposite party to return her whole amount of Rs.36,000/- after taking back the said low quality material  But the opposite party did not give any heed to the genuine requests of the complainant. The complainant sent legal notice  to the opposite party but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:

a)                replace the above said defective items with a new one or return the whole amount of Rs.36,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of purchase of the above said material i.e. 04.04.2021 till its realization.

 b)                pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

c)                 pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2.                 Notice  issued to opposite party on dated 26.7.2022 not received back either served or unserved.  Tracking details filed in which it had been mentioned that “Item Delivery Confirmed”.  Mandatory period of 30 days expired.  Hence, opposite party was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 12.09.2022.

3.                The complainant led evidence in support of his respective version.

4                  We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party – M/s. Banga Interiors with the prayer to: a)  replace the above said defective items with a new one or return the whole amount of Rs.36,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of purchase of the above said material i.e. 04.04.2021 till its realization.  b)        pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c)  pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.

                   To establish his case, the complainant  has led in his evidence Ex. CW1/A – affidavit of Smt. Renu, Annx.C-1 – Transaction successful.

6.                There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite party has not come present to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite party has rendered deficient services to the complainant. Hence the complaint is allowed against opposite party.

7.                Opposite party is directed to  refund the  amount after deducting the 10%  as he has used the items in question  for 9 months..  Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony  & harassment alognwith  Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.  The complainant is also  directed to hand over the old items in question to the opposite party after receipt of the copy of the order.  Compliance of this order  be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  File be consigned to the record room.

Announced on:  13.02.2023                                            (Amit Arora)

                                                                                            President

                        District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                           (Mukesh Sharma)

                       Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                             (Indira Bhadana)

                       Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Commission, Faridabad.