IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 31stday of March, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 254/2021 (filed on 27-10-2021)
Petitioner : Sherly Sunny @ Sherly George,
W/o. Sunny,
Kariyappuram House,
Ramapuram Bazar (via)
Pala, Kottayam – 686576
(Adv. A.R. Budhan and Adv. Abijith S.)
Vs.
Opposite Party : M/s. Life Style International
Pvt. (Ltd.) Ernakulam
Rep. by the Manager in charge,
Grand Mall, Edappally Junction,
Ernakulam
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
This complaint filed under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows.
The complainant purchased a Lewis Two Door Wardrobe from the opposite party on 21-02-2021 for an amount of Rs.8,950/-. On 13-04-21 the complainant purchased Lewis three Door Wardrobe with mirror and drawer for an amount of Rs.15,949/- and an ArvisHousten King Hinged Door bed with box storage for an amount of Rs.18,950/-. After a short period of two months,fungus like marks with excruciating foul smell developed over the above three items. Day by day the marks were spreading and the three furniture havebecome not useful to the complainant. The matter was informed to the opposite party. A service man visited the complainant’s house and was convinced of the damages. Complainant demanded for exchange of the damaged furniture items, but opposite party did not take any action to sort out the grievance of the complainant. Hence this complaint.
On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite party. The opposite party failed to file their version or to appear before the Commission to defend their case. The opposite party was set exparte.
Complainant filed proof affidavit and marked Exts. A1 and A2.
Ongoing through the complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant and evidence adduced, we would like to consider the following points.
- Whether there is deficiency in service from the side of the opposite party?
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider Point No.1 and 2 together.
Point No.1 and 2
On the basis of the complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant and evidence on record, it is clear that the complainant had purchased a Lewis two door wardrobe on 21-02-2021 from the opposite party for a payment of Rs.8,950/- and had purchased a Lewis three door wardrobe with mirror and drawer for an amount of Rs.15,949.80/- and another ArvisHousten king hinged door bed with box storage for an amount of Rs.18,950/- on 13-04-2021 from the opposite party. After a short period of two months, there developed fungus like marks with excruciating foul smell, over the above three furniture items. Day by day the marks were spreading and three furniture items have become not useful to the complainant.
Ext.A1 is the tax invoice dtd.21-02-2021 issued by the 1st opposite party to the complainant. Ext.A1 is the tax invoice for the purchase of six items including the Lewis two door wardrobe for a total amount of Rs.94,588/-. The price of the Lewis two door wardrobe alone is Rs.8,950/- Ext.A2 is the tax invoice dtd.13-04-2021 issued by the opposite party to the complainant for the purchase of three items for a total value of Rs.46,650/-. The price of the Lewis three door wardrobe with mirror and drawer is Rs.15,949.80/- and the price of the Arvishousten king hinged door bed with box storage is Rs.18,950/- The total purchase as per Ext.A1 and A2 were nine items. The complaint is with regard to three furniture items. The complainant duly intimated about the defective furniture to the opposite party. The opposite party failed to rectify the defects of the furniture or to sort out the grievance of the complainant. This act of the opposite party is deficiency in service from their part. Hence Point No.1 is found in favour of the complainant. We allow the complaint and pass the following order.
- The opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.43,849.80/- to the complainant on return of the three furniture items in serial .No.6 as per the Ext.A1 invoice and serial no. 1 and 2 as per the ext.A2 Tax invoice.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation for mental agony with cost Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
The Order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this Order in default the amount will carry an interest @ 6% per annum from the date of this Order till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 31st day of March, 2022
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Copy of tax invoice dtd.21-02-21 issued by opposite party
A2 - Copy of tax invoice dtd.13-04-21 issued by opposite party
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
Nil
By Order
Assistant Registrar
