JUDGEMENT

          Complainant a lady by filing this complaint alleged that she purchased one salwar suit along with some other garments from the op’s shop on paying the entire amount of Rs.3,960/- as per bill issued by op and at the time of purchase as because in the op’s shop and also there was so crowd of purchasers on that day due to Durga Puja marketing, the op requested the complainant to bring those garments in home and after wearing the same if she found any defect and not properly fitted with the complainant it shall be altered the same as per complainant’s requirement and it must be done within 7 days and that was purchased on 27.09.2013 against bill No.344 for a sum of Rs.3,960/-.

          On 24.09.2013 she again purchased few Kurties from op to go out station tour and similarly op issued a bill and being No.393 for a sum of Rs.2,500/- issued by op.  When complainant went to the op’s shop on 24.09.2013 asked the op that the Salwar was not fitted with her and therefore the complainant requested to exchange the same but the op suggested that to keep it for alteration and to come after some days and relying upon the version of the op, complainant kept it in the custody of op with hope that she was got back changing new Kurties after alteration.

          Accordingly on 27.09.2013 when she went to op’s shop to take back the Salwar and Kurties, it was not ready so, again op requested the complainant to come on 28.09.2013.  Then on that date op failed to deliver the same.  Ultimately on 30.09.2013 op returned the Salwar and Kurties to the complainant after complainant’s long wait, no scope was given to her for re-checking altered Salwar and Kurties by the op.  Thereafter when complainant went out station with her family on the very next date and she wore the said Salwar Suit and found that it was not fitted with her.  When complainant realized that the 3 Kurties were not altered and changed and the Salwar Suit alteration was also not done.  Considering the unfair trade practice of the op, complainant sent notice on 31.10.2013 through her Advocate by Speed Post with A/D calling upon the op for payment of damage of sum of Rs.1,00,000/- only for the mental agony and for damaging the said Salwar Suit and Kurties. 

          Op received the said notice on 02.11.2013 but did not take any step or did not repay the same compensation and for such sort of causing mental pain and agony and for deficiency of service including unfair trade practice complainant filed this complaint praying for refund of the said value of Rs.3,960/- along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.

          Fact remains the complaint was filed on 13.12.2013 and it was admitted on 19.12.2013 and thereafter the Summon was duly served upon the op on 22.03.2014.  Postal track report also supports the fact.  Further another notice was sent in respect of this complaint by Speed Post and that was received by op’s man J. Pal Singh on 03.01.2014 but anyhow op did not turn up for which the case was heard exparte.

                                                      Decision with reasons

          On careful study of the complaint including the document and the argument as advanced by the complainant and her Ld. Lawyer, it is found that the evidence adduced by the complainant in support of her complaint and to establish her purchase of Salwar and Kurties on 20.09.2013.  Complainant has proved the receipt issued by the op and from the receipt it is clear that complainant purchased that article on payment of Rs.3,960/-.

          Fact remains that the said Salwar did not fit with her body for which she went to the op’s shop room and purchased other articles and op assured her that it shall be altered and changed.  But after repeated tagid she got it back but when she was outside the station for tour she found that it was not usable because the said Salwar Suit and Kurties do not fit with her and in respect of her such grievance she wrote a letter through her Ld. Advocate to the op.  No doubt op received it on 02.11.2013 and one Pradip Kumar Gupta received the same on behalf of M/s. Geetanjali.  But anyhow op did not respond.  So, apparently from the letter of the Ld. Lawyer issued as demand notice by the complainant to the op simply speaks that before filing of this case, complainant herself through her Ld. Advocate sent a demand notice on 31.10.2013 and in that notice her grievance was also explained.  But op did not respond.  So, apparently it is clear that complainant was deceived by the op in purchasing such article on payment of Rs.3,960/- and fact remains op has not denied and challenged that grievance of the complainant by any means prior to filing of this case and even after filing of this case and not even after receipt of the notice, op appeared before this Forum to contest this case or deny the allegation of the complainant.

          Considering the voucher receipt in support of purchasing Salwar Suit and Kurties at a cost of Rs.3,960/- and also demand notice, it is clear that complainant purchased such articles but it was not anyway given her to use it because same does not fit with her body and as because op has not challenged the testimony including Ld. Lawyer’s demand notice.  Even if op got such claim notice but has not denied and in the above situation we have no other alternative but to rely upon unchallenged testimony of the complaint and the receipt issued by the op so we are convinced to hold that complainant purchased the said article for using it on payment of Rs.3,960/- but in reality she failed to use it as it did not fit for her and though she placed the same to the op for alteration, op kept it and returned it without any alteration.

          Subsequently it was found that alteration was made of that Salwar Suit and Kurties but even did not fit her.  So, it is clear that op with some ill motive sold away the same without giving any satisfaction to the customer to use it and op even after keeping it in their custody for alteration did not do that and it tantamounts to unfair trade practice and fact remains that it is impossible for complainant to use it.  So, no doubt op has duped the complainant as customer and consumer and no doubt the grievance of the complainant is that the dresses were not altered by the op for which op did not respond even after receipt of Lawyer’s letter sent by the complainant to the op.

          In the above situation for negligence and deficient manner of service and also for adopting unfair trade practice and further for deceiving the customer, complainant in such a manner complainant is entitled to get refund of the said amount including compensation for ops unfaithful business tactics and also for unfair trade practice and for causing mental pain and agony of the complainant till now.

          Thus the complaint succeeds exparte.

Hence, it is

                                                            ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed exparte with cost of Rs.2,000/- against op. 

          Op is hereby directed to refund Rs.3,960/- the value or cost of the purchase articles to the complainant (purchase value of the articles) and shall have also to pay a compensation of Rs.4,000/- for causing mental pain and agony to the complainant and also for adopting unfair trade practice and op shall have to pay the total sum of Rs.2,000/- as awarded cost + Rs.3,960/- for refund of receipt of money and also compensation for Rs.4,000/- i.e. total Rs.9,960/-  to the complainant within 15 days from the date of this order failing which for each day’s delay op shall have to pay punitive damages @ Rs.200/- per day till full satisfaction of the same and if it is collected, same shall be deposited to this Forum.

          For adopting unfair trade practice and for deceiving the customer in such a manner, op is imposed penal damages of Rs.5,000/- which shall be paid to this Forum and it is imposed for checking unfair trade practice adopted by the op and op shall have to pay within 15 days from the date of this order.

          For non-compliance and disobeyance of the Forum’s order op shall be prosecuted u/s 27 of the C.P. Act 1986 and for which further penalty and fine may be imposed and for that reason op shall be responsible.