Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/356/2018

AnithaWency Xavier - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s LTC Export Candles - Opp.Party(s)

M/s D Prsanna

25 Jan 2023

ORDER

                                                  Date of Complaint Filed : 20.07.2018

                                                  Date of Reservation      : 09.01.2023

                                                  Date of Order               : 25.01.2023

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                      THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                  :  MEMBER  I 

                      THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,          : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.356/2018

WEDNESDAY, THE 25^th DAY OF JANUARY 2023

Mrs. Anitha Wency Xavier (37 years),

W/o. Xavier George,

B8, vishwasanthi Apartments,

No.75, L.D.G. Road,

Little Mount, Saidapet,

Chennai – 600 015.                                                                                                                                 ... Complainant                

 

..Vs..

 

1.M/s.LTC Export Candles,

   Rep. by its Manager,

   Mr. P. Sasikumar

 

2.M/s. AARRAA Exports,

   Rep. by its Partner,

   Mrs.Usharani,

   Both 1 & 2 having office at

   No.596, VKK Menon Road,

   New Sidhapudur,

   Opposite BJP Office,

   Coimbatore – 641 044.                                                                                                                 ...  Opposite Parties

                                                                                                        ******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. D. Prasanna

Counsel for the Opposite Parties     : Exparte

 

On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant, we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

Pronounced by Member-II, Thiru. S. Nandagopalan., B.Sc., MBA.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to settle Rs.2,28,000/- for the purchase of machine along with wax and together with 12% interest from the date of purchase of machine till the date of realisation amounting Rs.24,750/- rent for the production unit amounting to Rs.42,000/- and Rs.5,000/- for transportation charges borne by the Complainant to deliver the machine and also to pay notional damages for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for which the Complainant suffered mental agony totalling to Rs.3,99,750/- and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation of the deficiency of service not negligent act as aforesaid and loss, mental agony and inconvenience suffered by the Complainant along with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant submits that the Opposite Parties published an advertisement in Daily Thanthi, Coimbatore edition on 24.5.2017. The advertisement mentions that the 1^st Opposite Party is ISO-certified and exports handmade candles. Believing the above advertisement to be true, the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party and purchased handmade dye and wax for manufacturing handmade candles from the 1^st  Opposite Party. During the purchase, the 1^st Opposite Party had imposed a condition that the Complainant should buy a semi-automatic candle machine from the 2^nd Opposite Party which would cost around 1 lakh then only both the Opposite Parties would buy finished product from the Complainant. Moreover, the Opposite Party had also assured and promised that the machine would produce nearly 80-100 kgs of candles per day and that the machine would make 2 kg of candles at a time and produce an average of 10 kg of candles in an hour. The Complainant further submits that, believing the sweet-coated words to be true, approached the 1^st Opposite Party to purchase the machine by paying 50% as an advance for the machine and the balance to be given in one month after delivery. The very next day the Complainant's husband went to Coimbatore to pay the advance but the 2^nd  Opposite Party informed the Complainant that, the originally agreed machine is not available but a 3 kg machine is available with an increased price of Rs.1,78,000/- including GST. Henceforth 2^nd Opposite Party convinced the Complainant and directed them to remit a sum of Rs.50,000/- as advance through cheque on 10.07.2017 and also informed the Complainant that all the transactions should be done only through 2^nd Opposite Party name AARRAA Exports instead of LTC Export Candles claiming that 2^nd Opposite Party it is a sister concern of "LTC EXPORT CANDLES'' which is the 1st Opposite Party company. 

 

The Complainant further states that on 11.09.2017 entered into an agreement between the Complainant and 2^nd Opposite Party thereby the 2^nd  Opposite Party promised the purchase of all the candles (finished product) made by Complainant with a profit of Rs.25/- per kg, moreover, Complainant further remitted the balance amount of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) on 14.7.2017 through RTGS to 2^nd Opposite Party account, on the assurance given by the 2^nd Opposite Party the machine would be delivered on or before 20.8.2017 and also would bear all the transport charges by the first Opposite Party, the Complainant trusted the both of the Opposite Parties and their words. At the end of August 2017, the 2nd Opposite Party threatened the Complainant and stated that, if the Complainant does not pay the balance amount, the machine would not be delivered and the amount which is paid already will not be returned to the Complainant, so the Complainant had paid the balance amount. However, despite extracting a huge sum, the 2^nd Opposite Party did not deliver the machine as agreed and accepted the delay till 13^th September 2017. But, the Opposite Parties further demanded to bear Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards transportation charges and delivered the machine at F2, Aswini Aksara, 3/25, LDG Road, Little Mount, Saidapet, Chennai. The Opposite Parties had also provided a demo for making the candles. The Complainant states that while the demonstration, the Complainant raised many doubts regarding the operation and processing of the Machine, but with an ulterior motive to deceive the Complainant the same was not clarified, repeated requests were made by the Complainant and her husband but the Opposite Parties refused to clarify the same and by ignoring and neglecting the Complainant.

The Complainant further submits that when she started the manufacturing process with the machine supplied by the Opposite Parties, a severe problem erupted from day one. Hence the Complainant had called both the Opposite Parties and informed them about the same. However, in a lethargic manner, both the Opposite Parties threatened the Complainant not to call and bother them again. The Complainant states that melted wax used to drip every time from the doors and spill on the whole thread rolls as the doors were not locking properly having a strip line of the gap in the machine, every time the wax falls on the thread it was a tedious two-day work to clean the wax from the thread and insert it again in the machine. The wooden blocks to hold the finished candles were also not working properly. Henceforth the Complainant requested to depute a technician which the Opposite Parties did not accede to. Even after paying the travel charges to the technician, the Opposite Parties did not send any technician to set right the machine. The Complainant states that from the above sequence of events, it is crystal clear that right from the inception, the Opposite Parties made false assurances and promises intending to deceive and defraud right from the inception, amounting to aggravate form of cheating. The worth of the machinery would be only Rs.50,000/- and whereas the Opposite Parties have extracted a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- for the faulty, damaged-and-worthless crap machine.

In February 2018 the Complainant approached advocate Mr.Sateeshsahayam to contact the 1st Opposite Party, the first Opposite Party told him to video record the whole process of manufacturing and send it through WhatsApp and also to send finished candles to the Opposite Party. Accordingly, the video was sent and 2 kg candles were sent also to the Coimbatore office on 12.2.2018 through courier. Thereafter, Mr.Sateeshsahayam tried to call both Opposite Parties but they did not respond. When the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties in person, the Opposite Parties threatened her that, if she demands the return of money or supply of new machinery, she would amount to the Opposite Parties dire consequences the Opposite Parties have further informed the Complainant that she had amassed wealth in similar ways from hundreds of persons and the Complainant is one such among them, and that, the Opposite Parties hired the number of goons and rowdies to threat and kill the persons, who demand the return of payment. The Complainant submitted that, in the name of commercial transaction, the Opposite Parties pretended and with malafide intention to cheat to achieve their ulterior object, they have duped and cheated the Complainant by supplying a scrap iron in the form of a machine and thereby they are living in guilt-free luxury at the death-knell crying of others. Both the Opposite Parties are one and the same however, to cheat the persons, they are trying to depict their identity as separate. Both of them laid their heads together and contrived a shenanigan to play a broad daylight cheating. Hence the Complaint.

3. The Complainant submitted her Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as  Ex.A1 to Ex.A-7. In spite of sufficient notice served on both the Opposite Parties, the Opposite parties failed to appear before this commission and they have been called absent and set Ex-parte.

Points for Consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for?

3. To what other relief the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No 1 :-

        The contention of the Complainant is that the 1^st Opposite Party advertised about their business proposal in Daily Thanthi Newspaper on 24.05.2017 as per the Ex.A-1 the Opposite Parties claiming them as an ISO Certified Company, providing Self Employment Business by sitting in home anyone can make daily income by manufacturing candles, setting the price of Rs.180/- for normal candles and Export candles for Rs.500/-, assuring to collect the finished product candles pickup from home and also they are providing loan facility as seen in their advertisement published in the newspaper. By believing the advertisement of the 1^st Opposite Party, the Complainant showed interest to take up this business opportunity henceforth contacted the 1^st Opposite Party and paid the advance amount of Rs.50,000/- on 10.07.2017 to the 2^nd Opposite Party as per Ex.A-3 in which it is mentioned that the delivery of the machine will be on or before 20^th  August 2017. And the balance amount of Rs.40,000/- was paid on 14.07.2017 assuming that the delivery of the machine will be on time. It is pertinent to note that there is no materialistic evidence enclosed supporting the Complainant claim for the payment of Rs.40,000/-. Meanwhile the Complainant entered into an agreement with the 2^nd Opposite Party on 11.09.2017 as per Ex.A-2 in that the 2^nd Opposite Party assured profit of Rs.25/- per kg to the Complainant. But as per the Complainant Averment the machine was not delivered on the stipulated timeline instead the 2^nd Opposite Party demanded the Complainant to settle the balance amount and even collected the amount of Rs.5000/- towards transportation charges and delivered the candle making machine on 13.09.2017 to the Complainant address in Chennai by providing a demo session for making the candles. Moreover during the demonstration, the complainant raised many doubts regarding the operation and processing of the machine, but with ulterior motive to deceive the Complainant the same was not clarified, repeated requests were made by the Complainant and her husband but the Opposite Parties refused to clarify the same by ignoring and neglecting making the Complainant to suffer. When the manufacturing process started with the machine supplied by the Opposite parties, severe problems were erupted to the Complainant henceforth contacted the Opposite parties to resolve the persisting issues from day one of the purchase in contrast the Opposite parties in a lethargic manner threatened and intimidated the Complainant not to call and bother them again giving the hardship and mental agony to the Complainant by not giving a required solution to fix the problems. The Complainant avers that without getting a proper training from the Opposite Party the Complainant was unable to handle the machine properly and faced the problems like melted wax used to drip every time from the doors and spill on the whole thread rolls as the doors were not locking properly having a strip line of gap in the machine allowing the wax to fall on the thread, it was a tedious two day work to clean the wax from the thread and insert it again in machine and also the wooden blocks to hold the finished candles were not working properly as seen in Ex.A-4 and Ex.A-5. All these hardships faced by the Complainant are merely of the fact that the Opposite Parties failure to demonstrate and clarify the working of the machine and to set right the machine which did not work properly inspite of several requests made by the complainant, amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered.

 

Point Nos. 2 and 3:-

            The Complainant though claim to have paid a sum of Rs.2,28,000/- for the purchase of machine along with wage had produced document Ex.A-3 showing Rs.50,000/- paid to the Opposite Parties. No proof for balance payment to the Opposite Parties is produced by the Complainant. As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties are liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-  towards deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.5,000/-. Accordingly Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered. 

In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally  directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) towards deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks  from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the above said amount of Rs.50,000/- shall carry interest @9% p.a from the date of the  date of receipt of this order till the date of realization.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

          In the result this complaint is allowed.          

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 25^th of January 2023.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	24.05.2017	Advertisement in Daily Thanthi
Ex.A2	01.09.2017	Agreement between Complainant and 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A3	10.07.2017 27.07.2017 & 11.09.2017	Invoice Bills from 2nd Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.A4	-	Candle machine pictures
Ex.A5	-	Damaged output candles pictures
Ex.A6	26.04.2018	Legal notice sent to the Opposite Parties
Ex.A7	01.05.2018	Returned postal cover

 

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

 

NIL

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT