Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/136/2021

Mrs.B.S.Preethi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Kaviya Artistry,Rep by its Proprietor,M/s.Kaviya - Opp.Party(s)

U.Kharunya Lakshmi

17 Oct 2023

ORDER

Complaint presented on  :27.09.2021    Date of disposal               :17.10.2023

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. G.VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.                            : PRESIDENT

                  TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN,M.E.,                          : MEMBER-1

                                THIRU V. RAMAMURTHY, B.A.B.L., PGDLA    : MEMBER II

 

C.C. No.136/2021

 

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 17^th  DAY OF OCTOBER 2023

 

B.S.Preethi,

G-3, 2/56, Vinayagar Koil  St,

Thenpalanai, Kolathur,

Chennai-600 099.                                                           .. Complainant.                                

..Vs..

 

M/s.Kaviya Artistry,

Rep. by its Prop Ms.Kaviya,

No.3, Agasthiyar St,

MMDA Nagar,

Chitlapakkam,

Chennai-600 064                                                               ..  Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainant                      : M/s. U.Kharunya Lakshmi &

                                                                   D.Yuvarajan

Counsel for   opposite party                     : M/s.M.V.V.N.Sivanthy.

 

 

ORDER

THIRU. V. RAMAMURTHY, B.A., B.L., PGDLA, MEMBER

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 prays to directing the Opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.475000/- as damages for indulging in the unfair trade practice of refusing to issue receipt for the advance received making deliberate and false statement that he has cancelled all her commitments for the month of June 2021 and for stealthily attending another bridal makeover at Vellore, leaving the complainant at lurch to suffer immense mental agony and tension and the cost of the complaint.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

        The complainant submits that she got engaged on 30^th October 2020 and her marriage was scheduled to be held on 20^th and 21^st June 2021.  As a part of arrangements, she made search on social media and after seeing the profiles the complainant chosen M/s. Kaviya Artistry, Chennai, the opposite party.  The complainant contacted the opposite party on 20^th March 2021 through whatsapp and enquired the availability for bridal makeover on 20^th and 21^st June 2021 and the opposite party assured to attend the wedding on the scheduled dates.  The complainant submits that from the given details by the opposite party the complainant opted for High-Definition makeup for Reception and Airbrush makeup for Marriage for a sum of Rs.38,000/- and paid Rs.15,000/- as advance and demanded confirmation receipt for the same for which the opposite party stated that the whatsapp message stood as receipt.  When the complainant asked for trial make up the opposite party informed that due to covid-19 there was no trial makeover sessions.  In the meantime on 7^th June 2021 the complainant received a message from the opposite party that her mother was affected with Covid-19 and she was about to cancel all the bridal makeovers pre-booked for the month of June and initiated refund, for which the complainant empathized and started to look for other makeup artists and their availability on 20^th and 21^st of the June.  The complainants after immense search finally get another makeup artist and the opposite party reluctantly refunded the advance money.  The complainant submits that through the friends of complainant on Instagram she noticed that the opposite party visited Vellore on 21^st June 2021 for another bridal makeover which put the complainant to anguish and shock and total disappointment.  After seeing the true colour of opposite party the complainant issued legal notice demanding an explanation and damages but the same was refused by the opposite party.  Hence this complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

The opposite party submits that the complaint filed by the complainant is misconceived and is based on false allegations and deny each and every allegation made in the complaint.  The present complaint is wrong and baseless and is therefore devoid of merits.  The opposite party submits that the opposite party is the proprietor of M/s. Kaviya Artistry and employed some staffs who work as beauticians along with her.  The complainant approached the opposite party for bridal makeup on 20.03.2021 through whatsapp and informed she got engaged in the month of October 2020 and the wedding is scheduled to take place in the month of April 2021.  Further the complainant enquired about the cost of bridal makeup for her wedding and the availability was confirmed through whatsapp.  The complainant while making enquiry informed that there are two occasions i.e. Reception and Wedding and therefore the opposite party booked two dates for complainant in April 2021 and on the given options the complainant had chosen High-Definition make up for reception and Airbrush for marriage at a cost of Rs.38,000/- and the complainant agreed to send Rs.15000/- as advance and the same was made through Google pay on 22.03.2021.  The opposite party states that during the 1^st week of April 2021 the complainant contacted the opposite party and informed that wedding date was changed to 20^th and 21^st June 2021 instead of April 2021 and further the complainant informed that she was not firm on the dates due to Covid-19 restrictions and the opposite party agreed for the rescheduled dates as a matter of customer relationship.  Further the complainant informed that reception event was cancelled due to covid restrictions, and the opposite party once again accepted the changes.  The opposite party submits that in the month of June 2021, the opposite party’s mother was affected in Covid-19, as an abundant caution the opposite party informed this to the complainant and for which the complainant was reluctant to proceed further with the opposite party and requested to suggest some one for make up on the same day.  The opposite party informed to send her team, but the complainant was not ready to accept and cancelled the contract on 06.07.2021 and the requested the opposite party to refund the advance and the opposite party also refunded the same on 06.07.2021.  The opposite party submits that it was the complainant who had cancelled the booking and informed her that she would be booking another makeup artist.  Under these circumstances the opposite party was contacted by another client for which she travelled to Vellore.  The opposite party further submits that opposite party being a very busy make up artist is mostly fully booked during wedding seasons and therefore it is frivolous of the complainant to state that she could not have travelled anywhere else for her bookings even after the complainant herself cancelled the booking for her wedding.  Therefore, the opposite party did not commit any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and hence the opposite party is not liable to pay any amount to complainant either towards compensation, cost of filing of this complaint or any other costs.  There was no cause of action arose for filing this complaint and the contentions raised by the complainant is baseless and devoid of any merit and deserves to be dismissed.  Therefore, it is humbly prayed that this complaint to be pleased to dismiss with exemplary costs and thus render justice.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs prayed in the complaint. If, so to what extent?

The complainant had filed proof affidavit, written arguments and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked on her side.The opposite party had filed written version, written arguments and no proof affidavit and no documents are filed on their side.Oral submissions of the learned counsels of both sides heard.

4. Point No.1:-

          The complainant contended that her marriage was fixed on 21^st June 2021 and to enquire about the availability for bridal makeover on 20^th and 21^st June 2021, the complainant called the opposite party through whatsapp 20^th March 2021 and the opposite party assured their readiness to attend the wedding on the scheduled dates for bridal makeover for an amount of Rs.38,000/-.  The complainant had paid a sum of Rs.15,000/-on 22^nd March 2021 as advance for the same.  The complainants alleged that on 7^th of June 2021 the opposite party had sent a message stating that her mother was affected with Covid-19 and she was about to cancel all the makeovers pre-booked for the month of June and intended to refund and therefore the complainant started searching for other makeup artists and managed to get another make up artist.  The complainant had received back the advance amount of Rs.15,000/- from the opposite party.  The complainant alleged that through her friends in social media i.e. Instagram she found that the opposite party visited Vellore for another makeover on 21^st June 2021 which put the complainant to shock and total disappointment and therefore the actions of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.The complainant had filed proof of making advance payment which is marked as Ex.A1, whatsapp chat messages as Ex.A2, repayment of advance as Ex.A3, proof of opposite party attending another marriage on 21.06.2021 for bridal makeup as Ex.A4, Proof of hiring new makeup artist as Ex.A5 and legal notice as Ex.A6.

          5. On the other hand, the opposite party contended that complainant had approached the opposite party on 20.03.2021 and informed that she got engaged in the month of October 2020 and the wedding is scheduled to take place in the month of April 2021 and enquired about the availability of the opposite party for bridal makeup for Reception and Wedding.  Accordingly, the opposite party booked two dates for complainant in the month of April 2021 and the total cost was fixed at Rs.38,000/- and the complainant had paid an advance amount of Rs.15,000/- on 22.03.2021.  The opposite party further contended that in the first week of April 2021 the complainant had informed the opposite party that the wedding date was changed to 21^st and 22^nd June 2021 however she was not firm on the dates due to covid restrictions and the opposite party as a matter of customer relationship agreed to do the makeup on the rescheduled dates.  The complainant further informed that due to rescheduling of dates reception event was cancelled due to covid restrictions and the opposite party agreed for the change.  The opposite party in the month of June 2021 as an abundant caution informed the complainant that her mother was affected in Covid-19 and the complainant was reluctant to proceed further with the opposite party and requested to suggest someone else for makeup on the same day.  The opposite party informed that she will send her team for the makeup but the complainant was not ready to accept and cancelled the contract on 06.07.2021 and requested the refund on the same day and the opposite party refunded the same immediately.  The opposite party contended that it was the complainant who cancelled the booking and informed the booking of another makeup artist, the opposite being a very busy artist during wedding seasons had visited Vellore for another makeup and therefore no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice was committed by the opposite party.

          6. We have carefully gone through the averments and documents of the complainant and opposite party and the submissions of learned counsels on both sides.  It is an admitted fact that complainant had approached the opposite party for bridal makeup on 20^th March 2021 that complainant got engaged on 30^th October 2020.  The complainant in her averments contended that she contacted the opposite party on 20^th March 2021 for bridal makeup on 20^th and 21^st June 2021.  Whereas the opposite party in their averments contended that initially the wedding was scheduled to take place in the month of April 2021 and requirement of makeup is for reception and wedding and subsequently the wedding date was rescheduled to 20^th and 21^st June 2021 and the reception event was cancelled due to covid-19 restrictions.  This contention of the opposite party was denied by the complainant and further on perusal of Ex.A2, it is observed that complainant in her whatsapp message on 20^th March 2021 enquired about the availability of opposite party on 20^th and 21^st June 2021 for bridal makeup and therefore the contention of the opposite party that the complainant informed that the wedding scheduled to take place in April 2021 is not maintainable in this regard.  It is further observed from Ex.A2, that opposite party had confirmed the dates on 20^th and 21^st June 2021 and the complainant had paid an advance amount of Rs.15,000/- on 22^nd March 2021 which is evidenced from Ex.A1.  There is no dispute regarding the total amount of makeup charges of Rs.38,000/-.  It is further observed from Ex.A2, when the complainant demanded receipt for the advance amount, the opposite party replied that no receipt will be issued and only confirmation message is the acknowledge of the receipt of advance.  On 20^th March 2021, during the whatsapp conversation, the complainant had sought for trial make up and the opposite party replied that it was stopped due to covid-19 and on 2^nd and 4^th April 2021 conversation the opposite party had agreed to arrange for trial as observed in Ex.A2. The complainant in her averments admitted that on 07.06.2021 she was informed by the opposite party that opposite party’s mother was affected on Covid-19 which is not disputed by the opposite party.  From the Ex.A2, it is observed that on 7^th June 2021 the complainant had asked the opposite party to suggest anyone else and again the complainant informed that she has seen someone else and sought for refund of advance to pay them advance.  From the averments of the opposite party and complainant it is observed that opposite party was ready to send their team alternatively, but the complainant refused to accept the same and since the complainant was very particular about engaging the complainant alone for makeup being an experienced person.  From the Ex.A2, it is observed that complainant and opposite party mutually agreed to end the contract with understanding. 

          7. The complainant in their written arguments contended that opposite party in their written version stated that complainant had cancelled the contract on 06.07.2021 and requested for refund of advance on 6^th of July 2021 thus not submitting the correct facts before this commission and further contended that it was opposite party who cancelled the booking stating her mother’s illness on 7^th June 2021 two weeks prior to marriage ceremony.  On perusal of Ex.A2, it is found that the dates are displayed in month-date-year format and hence it was reported as 06^th July 2021 instead of 7^th June 2021 and therefore much attention is not required in this regard.   But it appears from Ex.A2, the whatsapp conversation between complainant and opposite party that on hearing of opposite party’s mother was suffering on Covid-19, it was complainant who requested the opposite party to suggest someone else and again on same day informed that she had fixed someone else and requested for refund of advance for which the opposite party responded immediately by refunding the entire amount which is evidenced from Ex.A3.  Further the complainant in her averments had chosen M/s. Kaviya Artistry on seeing their previous bridal makeovers and not Ms. Kaviya in particular. When the opposite party was ready to depute their personnel, it was the complainant who refused to entertain them due to their inexperience and she was very particular for Ms. Kaviya being an experienced person and she was ready to give Rs.38,000/- to Ms. Kaviya and not for any amateur makeup artist as averred in her written arguments (Para 15). Therefore, it is found from Ex.A2 and other documents that the termination of contract was initiated by complainant and finally ended on mutual consent.  

          8. The complainant alleged that through her friends in the Instagram she found that opposite party visited Vellore on 21^st June 2021 for another engagement which put the complainant to anguish and disappointment.  Further the complainant alleged that opposite party lied that her mother had fallen sick due to Covid-19 for which there is no proof. Whereas the opposite party defended that since the contract was cancelled by the complainant on hearing the opposite party mother’s illness and the opposite party being an experienced person in this field and fully engaged during marriage season went to Vellore for another engagement.  From the above, it is concluded that contract was terminated on mutual consent on receipt of refund of advance amount and therefore the complainant is not having any right to raise the question about the movements of opposite party and their engagements on 21.06.2021 at vellore and it will not amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party.

          9. Based on the above facts and circumstances, the commission is of considered view that the contract was terminated on mutual consent and there is no obligation on both sides and therefore there is no deficiency of service and unfair trade practice is observed on the part of opposite party and hence the complainant is not entitled for the claims made in the complaint.  Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

10. Point No.2:

                Based on the findings given to the PointNo.1, since there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party and hence the complainant is not entitled for the damages or compensation as prayed in the complaint. Point no.2 answered accordingly.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed.  No costs.    

Dictated  by Member II to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 17^th day of October 2023.

 

MEMBER I                                  MEMBER – II                           PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	22.03.2021	Proof if making advance payment.
Ex.A2	March to June 2021	Whatsapp chat messages.
Ex.A3	07.06.2021	Advance payment.
Ex.A4	21.06.2021	Proof of the opposite party attending another marriage for bridal makeup.
Ex.A5	09.06.2021	Proof of hiring new makeup artiste.
Ex.A6	06.07.2021	Lawyers notice.

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  OPPOSITE PARTY:

 

No documents

 

MEMER – I                           MEMBER – II                       PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.C.No.136/2021, Dated:17.10.2023 Order Pronounced,           In the result the Complaint is  dismissed. No costs.   Member-I    Member-II        President