Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/671/2015

Ms. Sania Marwaha - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Health Sanctuary - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

23 May 2016

ORDER

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

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	671 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	23.11.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	23.05.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Ms.Sania Marwaha d/o Sh.Kishan Chand, residing at H.No.187, VIP Road, Zirakpur.

             …..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  Health Sanctuary, A-1/19, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi – 10029 through its Managing Director.

 

2]  Dr.Savita Sarmal, A-1/19, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi – 110029, through its Managing Director.

 

3]  Dr.Anu, M/s Health Sanctuary, A-1/19, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, through its Managing Director.

 

4]  Dr.Lakshami, A-1/19, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, through its Managing Director.

 

5]  Dr.Nadeem, M/s Health Sanctuary, SCO No.143-144, Ist Floor, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:   SH.RAJAN DEWAN                                   PRESIDENT

                   SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU                MEMBER

                   MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA                            MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     OPs No.1 & 2 exparte.

 

 

 

PER JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER

 

 

          Shorn of all unnecessary details, suffice it to mention here that the Complainant, being allured by false the assurance given by Opposite Party No.2 about good & effective treatment in respect of her facial muscle problems and hair issues, she was facing, visited M/s Health Sanctuary/OPs.  It is stated that OPs prepared her sketch (Ann.C-2) and told that treatment would take 3 months or a little more. Thereafter, as asked, she deposited Rs.4500/- with the Opposite Parties for the said treatment and further deposited the balance amounts, from time to time, as asked for by the OPs, and as such deposited a total sum of Rs.1,29,500/- with them. 

 

        It is stated that the package so given by the Ops mentions “face bio lift+hair-meso”.  It is also stated that the Ops gave 2 times some BESAN-aloe-vera packs and tried a machine on complainant’s face. However, the machine never seemed to do anything. It is further stated that the system of treatment by the OPs was wholly un-professional and erratic.  It is pleaded that on 22.12.2014, the OP No.3 along with other started their fake clumsy treatment on the complainant’s face and in the end of the day, it caused significant allergic reactions like redness, acne, rashes etc. and some drug was injected into the fact, but details thereof was not disclosed.  It is also pleaded that Op No.3 gave three injections on her head without any fore-warning or informed consent. It is asserted that due to said injection, the complainant felt giddiness and felt faint about, which she complaint to Ops, but said it happens to everyone. It is also asserted that when the complainant went back home, she could not get up for 3 continuous days and her blood pressure dropped to 40 mmHg and when finally she informed the OPs, they did not pay any heed. It is further asserted that when the complainant visited the OPs to discuss the whole issue, they threatened her with dire consequences if she visit again.  Then she filed a complaint at Police Window for lodging the FIR (Ann.C-11) but not FIR was lodged.  It is submitted that the complainant had to leave her job as Associate Profession with Chandigarh University, in order to get the treatment from the Ops, but all went in vain due to negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.  Hence, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Party No.1 to 4 and Op No.5 though being duly served through notice sent by registered post-dated 30.3.2016 & 30.11.2015 respectively, failed to put in appearance on 11.5.2016 & 04.01.2016, thus raising presumption under Sub-clause (2) of Regulation 10 of The Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, the OPs No.1 to 4 & OP No.5 were proceeded exparte vide order dated 11.5.2016 & 04.01.2016.

 

3]       Complainant led evidence in support of his evidence.

 

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

 

5]       The complainant through her present complaint has claimed that the OPs are in the business of wellness therapy with specialization in different fields and on being allured by their advertisement blitzkrieg opted for a three months wellness package by making a payment of Rs.1,29,500/- in installments on different occasions. However, after going through their complete schedule of therapy session, she did not find any improvement as promised by the OPs.  On the contrary, as she was already under employment with Chandigarh University, Ghaduan, had applied for a three months without pay leave, causing her losses towards her salary of three months also.  The complainant had duly served a legal notice upon the OPs raising her grievance against them and having given them the opportunity to make good of her losses by refunding her money, but as her grievance remained unaddressed by the OPs, has preferred the present complaint citing deficiency in service on their part, seeking refund of her money along with compensation for being harassed at their hands. 

 

6]       The averments of the complaint, which are duly supported by the documents placed on record by the complainant as well as her sworn affidavit, have not been controverted by the OPs as they failed to put in appearance, even though being duly served upon, by filing their reply/version.  Therefore, all the averments of the present complaint against the OPs go unrebutted & uncontroverted.  Hence, we are left with no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the OPs citing deficiency in service on their part.

 

7]       In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite Parties are found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainant is allowed qua OPs. The Opposite parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

 

[a]      To refund an amount of Rs.1,29,500/- to the complainant, along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint;

 

[b]      To pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as consolidated amount of compensation for causing her mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service.

[c]     To pay Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant. 

         The above said order shall be complied within 45 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall be jointly & severally liable to pay an interest @18% per annum, on amount of Rs.1,29,500/- to the complainant, from the date of filing of the complaint till it is paid and also on the compensation amount of Rs.25,000/- from the date of filing of the complaint till it is paid, apart from paying litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

23^rd May, 2016                                                             Sd/-

                                                                   (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

                                                                                                                      

 

 

DISTRICT FORUM – II

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.175 OF 2016

PRESENT:   None   Dated the 23rd day of May, 2016

O R D E R                        Vide our detailed order of even date, recorded separately, the complaint has been allowed against the Opposite Parties.                     After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

 

(Priti Malhotra)	(Rajan Dewan)	(Jaswinder Singh Sidhu)
Member	President	Member