Date of Complaint : 20.06.2014
Date of Order :11.02.2016
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT : THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER – I
DR.T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.No. 386 / 2014
THIS THURSDAY 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
Mr. John Justin,
S/o. A.Arul,
No.75, Appu Street,
2nd Floor,
Mylapore,
Chennai 600 004. .. Complainant.
- Vs-
Mr. Sheik, Proprietor, La Designs, Bangalore. .. Opposite party. | | .. Opposite party. |
| | |
For the complainant : M/s. S.Muthuvenkatraman & another
For the opposite party : Exparte
ORDER
THIRUMATHI.K.AMALA, :: MEMBER-I
1. Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite party to pay the equivalent amount invested in the subject Sofa with interest and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/ as compensation for mental agony to the complainant.
2. Even after receipt of the notice from this forum in this proceeding, the opposite party did not appear before this Forum and did not file any written version. Hence the opposite party was set exparte on 3.3.2015.
3. Perused the complaint, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 filed by the complainant and proof affidavit and the entire C.C. records and considered the arguments of the complainant counsel.
4. The complainant contented that he placed an order with the opposite party on 12.1.2013 for purchase of Teak wood Sofa set and King size cot at value of Rs.78,000/- in the Chennai Trade Centre during Consumer Exhibition conducted by the Hindu held during January 2013 and paid a sum of Rs.38,000/- on the same day by means of credit card and remaining Rs.40,000/- was paid on the date of delivery.
5. The complainant further contended that when the sofa was delivered he found that it was in total contrast to what was actually displayed at Exhibition and also inferior in quality. Further insects were coming out of the cushion and there were defects of “a big rough, black batch on the right hand side of the three seater, wooden chipping found in 3 to 4 places more specifically on the left top arm rest, completely left unfinished under the all arm rest, the cushions were of varying sizes and innumerable scratches all over the Sofa which shows that it has been returned by another customer and forwarded to the complainant. Hence he informed about the said defects to the opposite party. The opposite party personal inspected the said sofa and stated that the rectification has to be done only by sending the same to Bangalore. Hence he sent compliant as well as legal notice to the opposite party which was received by him but failed to comply his grievance. Hence he filed the above complaint to pay the value of the Sofa along with compensation.
6. It is evidenced through Ex.A1 that the complainant had purchased a sofa set and a cot for Rs.78,000/- and paid the full amount to the opposite party. The main grievance of the complainant is that the opposite party had delivered the complaint mentioned sofa with the defects of insects coming out of the cushions, a big rough, black batch on the right hand side of the three seater, wooden chipping found in 3 to 4 places more specifically on the left top arm rest, completely left unfinished under the all arm rest, the cushions were of varying sizes and innumerable scratches all over the Sofa. Immediately when he intimated to the opposite party they inspected the said Sofa and informed that the defects can be rectified only by sending back the sofa to its place of Origin i.e. Bangalore. But they did not rectify the said defects.
7. Hence the contention of the complainant that the opposite party had delivered sofa with innumerable defects without completion of actual job and did not even took any effort to rectify the said defects despite of receipt of complaint as well as legal notice (Ex.A4) and as such the opposite party had committed deficiency of service is acceptable.
8. Though the complainant sought relief to direct the opposite party to pay the equivalent amount invested in the subject sofa, the cost of the sofa is neither separately mentioned in the purchase bill i.e. Ex.A1 nor in the prayer column of the complaint. But based on the Memo filed by the complainant stating that the value of the sofa mentioned in the complaint is Rs.30,000/- we admit the same.
9. Whereas though the complainant stated the defects in the sofa he did not give the value of the said defects hence we estimate the value of the complaint mentioned defects in the sofa to be approximately Rs.10,000/-. Therefore the opposite party is liable to pay the above said amount to the complainant for their deficiency in service.
10. Further the contention of the complainant that due to the defects in the sofa he had suffered much hardship is also acceptable as such the opposite party is also liable to pay compensation to the complainant towards mental agony.
11. Nevertheless the defects mentioned in the complaint shows the deficiency in service of the opposite party the grievance of the complainant to return the entire cost of the sofa is not sustainable at this stage since we presume that it is an used one.
12. Further the opposite party also has not appeared before this forum to give any contra evidence in order to defend their case. Hence he was set exparte.
13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the considered view that the opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the value of the defects in the complaint mentioned Sofa and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- as litigation charges to the complainant.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards the value of the defects in the complaint mentioned Sofa and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only) as litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the above amounts (Rs.10,000/- + Rs.10,000/-) shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of realization.
Dictated directly by the Member-I to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 11h day of February 2016.
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s Side documents :
Ex.A1- 12.1.2013 - Copy of invoice.
Ex.A2- 7.6.2013 - Copy of Postal receipt.
Ex.A3- 7.6.2013 - Copy of complaint and legal notice.
12.1.2013.
Ex.A4- - - - Copy of Ack. Card.
Opposite party’s side documents: -
.. Nil .. (exparte)
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
