Delhi

North

CC/390/2022

SHASHI AGGARWAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S KITCHEN KOSMETICS - Opp.Party(s)

14 Aug 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

Consumer Complaint No.390/2022

In the matter of

Ms. Shashi Aggarwal

R/o A-115, Kamla Nagar,

Shakti Nagar Chowk

Delhi-110007                                                                                               …Complainant

                                                                                   

Versus

Ms. Gunjan Goyal   

W/o Sh. Rajeev Goyal

Proprietor of M/s Kitchen Kosmetics

R/o-H.No.9, Road No.321, Ist Floor,

Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-110026                                                         ...Opposite Party

                                                                                                                                                           

ORDER

14/08/2024

Ms.Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member

1. Jurisdiction of this commission has been invoked by Ms.Shashi Aggarwal, the complainant against Ms.Gunjan Goyal, Proprietor, M/s Kitchen Kosmetics, the OP with the allegations of deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.
2. Facts as per complaint are that the complainant, a senior citizen was looking for conversion of the old kitchen with new modular kitchen in her premises. It has been stated that OP is engaged in developing and renovating of modular kitchen thus OP shared pictures of raw-material to be used with the complainant. After discussion it was agreed between the complainant and OP that the total cost for conversion for modular kitchen will be Rs.2,13,000/-.
3. The complainant paid Rs.1,05,000/- by way of cheque/cash. The complainant has alleged that the OP did not finish the work on one pretext or the other and after that lockdown/restrictions were imposed due to COVID, the work got further delayed. 
4. The complainant has alleged that despite receiving Rs.1,05,000/- the OP has completed only 30% of the work and after that started avoiding the calls and whatsapp messages by the complainant . OP also demanded the balance amount for finishing the work.
5. On 25/03/2022, the complainant approached another developer and paid Rs.98,000/- for completion of conversion of her  kitchen.  The complainant has stated that all this time the complainant was living without kitchen which caused hardship.
6. A Legal notice dated 09/05/2023 (seems to be a typographical error, should have been 08/05/2022) was served upon OP seeking refund of the excess amount. The said Legal notice was replied by the OP vide reply dated 08/06/2022
7. Alleging the deficiency in services on part of OP in not completing the work as agreed the complainant has prayed for directions to OP to refund the excess amount received by them; Rs.1,34,000/- paid by the complainant to another developer for completion of the remaining work in her kitchen with 18% interest till the date of disposal of the case; Rs.2,00,000/- on account of damages/losses suffered by the complainant and her family members mentally as well as physically and Rs.20,000/- as cost of litigation.
8. The complainant has annexed whatsapp chat as Annexure-A, Legal Notice dated 08/05/2022, reply dated 08/06/2022 to the legal notice and copy of the Adhaar Card with the complaint.
9. Notice of the present complaint was issued to OP, thereafter, written statement was filed on their behalf taking several pleas in their defence such as the complaint is abuse of process of law, complainant has concealed material fact, there is no deficiency in services as complaint is based on false, frivolous and baseless allegations.  It has been submitted that complainant failed to deposit 50% of the total amount as agreed as per quotation.
10. It has been further submitted that OP started the work for conversion of old kitchen with new one modular kitchen and left the raw material at site and affixed 50% of the material. The complainant did not make the balance payment despite demanded by OP/staff. 
11. After relaxation in the restrictions imposed due to COVID-19, the OP contacted the complainant many times for the completion of the work as well as payment of the balance amount. However, the complainant misbehaved and used filthy language.
12. OP has submitted that the complainant did not let OP complete the pending work stating that the complainant had to move out of Delhi due to personal reasons. OP has installed the part of modular kitchen worth Rs. 1,77,000/- and remaining 30% work is pending. OP has completed 70% of the work despite the fact that the complainant has paid only Rs. 1.05.000/-. Hence, they are entitled to recover the cost of raw material along with damages/interest/harassment cost by the complainant.
13. It is further submitted that OP has suffered great financial loss as the cost of the raw material has touched sky but they were still willing to finish the work upon receipt of the balance amount but the complainant instead of making the payment issued legal notice which was dully replied. Rest of the contents of the complaint have been denied with the prayer of dismissing the complaint with heavy cost being false, frivolous and vexatious. They have annexed the reply to the legal notice along with speed post receipts.
14. Rejoinder to the written statement has been filed by the complainant re-iterating the contents of the complaint and denying those of the written statement. Evidence by way of affidavit has been filed by the complainant by re-iterating the facts of the complaint and has got the conversation and messages exchanged as Ex.A.
15. OP has got examined MS Gunjan Goyal, Proprietor, M/s. Kitchen Kosmetics. The contents of the written statement have been repeated. They have relied on the copy of terms and conditions and referred to it as Ex.RE-1/1 but the same has not been filed with the written statement. The reply to the legal notice has been exhibited as Ex.RE-1/2.
16. We have heard the arguments addressed by the complainant and Ld. Counsel for the OP. We have also perused the material placed on record. The agreement for conversion of old kitchen to modular kitchen for Rs. 2,13,000/- is not in dispute. Further, payment of Rs. 1,05,000/- by the complainant to the OP is also not in dispute.
17. During arguments Ld. Counsel for OP pointed out that the message sent by OP on 24/07/2020 in the Whatsapp conversation (Ex.A) has been deleted.  At the same time OP too has not filed the deleted message/conversation and was unable to tell the content of the deleted message. At the same time OP has also not filed the list of articles/material left onsite.
18.  With the written arguments OP has filed certain documents such as terms and conditions and email dated 07/08/2019. OP is unable to explain as to why they were not filed with the written statement when they were in possession of these documents. Hence, we are not considering these documents. OP has also not filed the email referred by them in (Ex.A) where OP has stated ‘Pls check with ur daughter. I have emailed her the payment terms’.
19. At the same time, the OP has not filed any document in support of their defence to show that they had finished 70% of the work. If we go through Ex.RW-1/2(reply to the Legal Notice). In para7 reproduced as under:

With regard to the contents of para no.7 of your notice under reference are denied for want of knowledge. It is specifically mention that my client already installed the part of modular kitchen worth of Rs.1,77,000/-(one lac seventy seeven thousand) and today there is lot of rate variation in the raw material of Modular Kitchen. Moreover, client is ready to complete work if your client paid the escalation price of raw material of modular kitchen. The fact is very well in the knowledge of your client and your client to raise pressure on my client suppress these facts from you.

20. Thus, from the para reproduced above, it is clear that OP had stopped the work in between and was demanding extra money on account of escalation in price of the raw material. It is clear breach on part of OP by demanding extra money than agreed at the time of agreement. This act of OP amounts to restrictive trade practice as defined in Section 2(41) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
21. Kitchen is an integral part of every household and the act/omission on part of OP has deprived the complainant and her family from using the Kitchen especially in difficult times of COVID and subsequently. For this reason the complainant is also entitled to compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as OP had undertaken the assignment of conversion in August 2019 but failed to finish the work and resorted to restrictive trade practice.
22. The complainant has alleged that she had to pay Rs. 1,34,000/- to another developer for getting the work completed, this is also not substantiated by any documentary evidence. The complainant has filed only one bill of Rs. 14,256.99                ( Fourteen Thousand two hundred fifty six and 99 paisa only)
23.  Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present complaint, we direct OP to pay Rs. 14,256.99 alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e 24/09/2022 till realisation. We further award compensation of Rs. 10,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment.
24. The order be complied with in 4 weeks from the date of receipt of order. In case of non-compliance OP shall pay interest @ 12% per annum on Rs.24,256.99                          ( Rs.14,256.99+ Rs. 10,000/-) from the date of order till realisation.
25. Office is directed to supply the copy of this order to the parties as per rules. Order be also uploaded on the website.  Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

(Harpreet Kaur Charya)               Member	(Ashwani Kumar Mehta)                          Member   (Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)           President