Date of Filing : 02.07.2015
Date of Order : 28.03.2016.
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
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.273/2015
MONDAY THIS 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2016
V. Muthukumar,
S/o. Vaidhyaraman,
Vasantha Avenue,
M.R.C. Nagar,
Chennai 600 028. ..Complainant
..Vs..
M/s. N.I. Kauvery Silk & Handicrafts Emporium,
Rep. by its Manager,
No.3149, Dawood Khan Street,
Five Light Circle,
Lashkar Mohalia,
Mysore 570 001. ..Opposite party
For the Complainant : M/s.V.Balaj & another
For the Opposite party : Exparte.
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- towards the advance amount and also to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and deficiency in service and also to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as cost of the complaint to the complainant.
ORDER
THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT
The complainant has stated that he has placed an order to the opposite party who is the manufacture of furniture products, for purchase of Double Pillar Swing with carving and Dining table with eight chairs for the total cost of Rs.8,25,000/- and paid advance of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.25,000/- by cash and also paid a sum of Rs.2,05,000/-. the purchase bill Ex.A1 and the bank statement Ex.A2 and the email Ex.A6 sent by the opposite party to the complainant are proved the same. The complainant further states that opposite party has not completed the work as ordered within the reasonable time as promised by the opposite party i.e 90 days from the date of advance was made. The opposite party by their email dated 25.09.2014 has admitted that they have completed 50% of work subsequently by their email dated 24.10.2014 informed that they have completed 75% of work only for the product ordered for purchase. The complainant further stated that they have received an email from Texas Cargo Services, Bangalore who is the shipping agent of the opposite party that they would charge Rs.1500/- US dollars for pre-shipment charges for the export of said items to the port and also stated that they are not responsible for other intent charges, however the complainant was shocked with the said information as regarding the said hidden and shipping charges was not discussed at the time of booking. Therefore the complainant asked the opposite party for refund of the said advance amount. Since the opposite party has not disclosed the shipping and hidden charges for the said product at the time of booking and also not delivered the product ordered within reasonable time, which amounts to deficiency of service, as such the complainant has filed this complaint for refund of advance amount with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation charges against the opposite party.
2. Though the opposite party have received the notice sent by this forum, the opposite party was not appeared before this forum on 17.08.2015, the opposite party was called absent, and set exparte.
3. The complainant has filed his proof affidavit and marked the documents as Ex.A1 to Ex.A7.
4. Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, proof affidavit and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 and considered the arguments of the complainant’s counsel. The Ex.A1, Ex.A2 and A6 are proves that as stated by the complainant, the complainant has ordered for purchase of double pillar swing with carving and Dining table with 8 chairs for the total cost of Rs.8,25,000/- with the opposite party and paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- as advance. Though the complainant has averred in the complaint that, as per the emails sent by the opposite party dated 24.09.2014 and 25.10.2014, the opposite party has admitted that they have not completed the work of the said product, and not made ready for delivery, no document of proof for the said averment on the side of complainant is filed. However considering the content of the exchange of emails Ex.A3 to A6 between the complainant and the opposite party and the shipping agent of the opposite party proves that there was a dispute with regarding the shipment and other hidden charges for the transport of the said products from Mysore to Los Angles, USA where the complainant is presently residing. Further on going through the content of the Ex.A1 Export order confirmation it is found that the parties the complainant and the opposite party have not decided about who has to meet out the shipment and other charges for the transport of the said product, because though there were options found for FOB, COF, CIF they were kept without opted for as blank, whereas in the column in the shipping charges only it is found written as “Customers Port Delivery”. Therefore as contended by the complainant that as per the e.mail sent by the opposite party dated 25.09.2014 and 24.10.2014, the entire work of the product ordered for was not completed by the opposite party. Therefore on the basis of the content of the exchange of emails it can very well be concluded that there is no proper, enforceable final or concluded contract or agreement between the parties with regard to the completion of work of the ordered product by the opposite party and to deliver the same to the complainant with detail particulars such as who has to bear the shipment and transport charges etc., Further admittedly the complainant also not paid the major portion of the balance for the said proposed purchase product to the opposite party.
5. Therefore considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and that complainant having effected legal notice for the demand of refund of the said advance amount by Ex.A7 the opposite party remained not given reply for the said notice and also remained exparte in this proceedings as sought for by the complainant the opposite party is liable to refund the said advance amount of Rs.2,50,000/- according to our view is justifiable. But complainant claim of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- under two different heads sought for in the complaint cannot be permissible considering the facts and circumstances of the case. However the complainant is entitled to get refund of the above said amount with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of legal notice i.e Ex.A7 dated 10.4.2015 to till the date of payment. The complainant is also entitled for a sum of Rs.2500/- towards litigation charges against opposite party.
In the result, this complaint is partly allowed, the opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs and fifty thousand only) (which was received as advance) with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 10.04.2015 to till the date of payment and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) towards litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order.
Dictated directly by the President to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 28th day of March 2016.
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents:
Ex.A1- - - Copy of purchase bill.
Ex.A2- - - Copy of Bank Statement.
Ex.A3- 4.3.2015 - Copy of email by opposite party agent.
Ex.A4- 4.3.2015 - Copy of email by the complainant.
Ex.A5- 9.3.2015 - Copy of email by the opposite party.
Ex.A6- 9.3.2015 - Copy of email by the opposite party.
Ex.A7- 10.4.2015 - Copy of Advocate notice with postal proof.
Opposite party’s Exhibits:-
.. Nil .. (Exparte)
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
