IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Monday,   the 30^th  day of November, 2015

Filed on 23..04..2015

Present

1)         Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

2)         Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)

3)         Smt. Jasmine D (Member)

in

CC/No.124/2015

 Between

       Complainant:-                                                                                 Opposite party:-

 Smt. Sophyamma Joseph                                                                   M/s. Koorayil Shoe Mart

Parathara House                                                                                  West of A.V.J., Mullackal

Thathampally P.O.                                                                              Alappuzha – 688 011

Alappuzha – 688 013 

O R D E R

SRI. ANTONY XAVIER (MEMBER)

The complainant‘s case in precise is as follows:-

The complainant on 5^th April 2015 purchased two bags and a pair of footwear from the opposite party for the total amount of Rs.1900/-.  On taking the articles, so purchased from the opposite party to her residence, the complainant found that one of the bags was damaged.   The complainant to 7^th April came over to the opposite party’s shop and impressed upon him that the bag was damaged and sought the cost of the bag Rs.1,155/- .  The opposite party took the bag with them, but was not only reluctant to pay back the complainant, but also harassed her.  The complainant repeatedly requested the cost of the damaged bag, but the opposite party kept on harassing the complainant.  The complainant sustained mental agony and monetary loss.    On got aggrieved on his the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and relief. 

2.  On notice being sent the opposite party turned up and filed version.  The contention of the opposite party is that the bag has no sort of warranty.  Still he was very much prepares to either repair the bus or replace the same with good one.  He is still prepared to do so.  But the complainant was not keen on accepting both.  According to the opposite party the contention of the complainant that the bag was damaged is baseless.  The opposite party contends that the complaint is without any basis and the same is to be dismissed.

              3.  The complainant was examined as PW1 and the document Ext.A1 was marked.  The opposite party cross examined the complainant, but not adduced any further evidence.    

            4.  Taking into account, the complainant’s contention, the questions that crop up before us for consideration are:-

1. Whether the opposite party committed unfair trade practice / deficiency in service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?

5.  Point Nos. 1 & 2:-    Concededly the complainant has purchased the material bag from the opposite party.  The crux of the complainant as it does appear is that the material bag was defective.  Notwithstanding the complainant convinced the same to the opposite party.  The opposite party was reluctant to refund the cost of the same.  The opposite party got the bag from the complainant and harassed her.  To substantiate the complainant’s case the complainant produced Ext.A1 document.  Admittedly the several occasion, the complainant visited the opposite party and sought the cost of the bag only to get humiliated at the hands of the opposite party.  On a meticulous perusal of the entire materials available on record, we found no reason to disbelieve the complainant’s case.  What is more, it is worthy of notice that the opposite party has not made any serious attempt to deny or made any serious attempt to deny or dispute the complainant’s case except making an indistinct denial of the complainant’s contentions.  In the light of this back drop, we are of the firm view that the material article was marked with imperfection.  Since the initial stage of its purchase and the complainant was compelled to take the same to the opposite party.  The complainant was made to run from pillar to post to get her issues restored.  Thus viewing from any angle, we hold that the contentions put forth by the opposite party do not persuade us to place reliable on its version.  Needless to say, we are of the considered view that the practice of the opposite party is unfair and the complainant is entitled to get relief. 

            In the wake of what have been elaborated supra the opposite party is directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,155/- (Rupees one thousand one hundred and fifty five only) the cost of the material bag to the complainant and opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards compensation to the complainant.  The opposite party is further directed to pay an amount of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant.  The opposite party shall comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of the same.

Pronounced in  Open Forum on this the 30^th day of November, 2015.

                                                                                          Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)

Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

  Sd/-  Smt. Jasmine D (Member)

APPENDIX

Evidence of  the Complainant:

PW1                -           Sophyamma Joseph (Witness)

Ext. A1           -           Bill dated 5.4.2015

Evidence of  the opposite party:       Nil

//True copy//                                                                                                               

                                                                                                                         By Order

                                                                                            Senior Superintendent                                       

To

            Complainant/Opposite parties/SF

Typed by: pr/-

Compared by:-