BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.

                                                Consumer Complaint no. 231 of 2021                                                                

                                              Date of Institution:          13.09.2021

                                                Date of Decision   :     10.08.2022

Kavita Garg w/o Sh. Sanjeev Garg Adv. 15/ 237 Bansal Colony, Sirsa.

                     ……Complainant.

                                      Versus

M/S SHEE N SHEE Footwear’s through its Prop./ Manager, Near Fashion Camp, Gali Fashion Camp Wali, Rori Bazar, Sirsa (Haryana).

                                                                            ...…Opposite party.

                     Complaint under Section 35 of C.P. Act, 2019

Before:       SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR…….PRESIDENT

MRS. SUKHDEEP KAUR…………MEMBER        

SH. SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA………MEMBER

Present:       Sh. S.K. Garg, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Dharmender Chauhan, Advocate for opposite party.

ORDER

                   The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as Op).

2.       In brief, the case of complainant is that op firm is trading in the name Shee N Shee footwears and selling very low quality self made products in his shop and elsewhere. That about 8/9 months ago, she wanted to purchase a pair of branded sleepers like liberty/ Lee-cooper for her personal use and went to op’s shop and employee of the op sold a Miss brand sleepers to her against the amount of Rs.1300/- with full assurance of one year full guarantee and good quality. It is further averred that after wearing two times within 3/4 months, the sleepers began to shatter and she felt herself cheated and approached to op for replacement. The op asked her to leave the sleepers and come after one/ two days and after two/ three days when she again went to shop of op for replacement of sleepers, she was astonished to see their un-commendable behavior against well mannered lady consumer and two employees of op misbehaved with her and used filthy language in the presence of her mother-in-law Smt. Prem Lata. They also threatened them and stated that neither they will replace the sleeper nor will refund Rs.1300/- and in this way their behavior was very rude and they cheated her as well as insulted her. It is further averred that a legal notice in this regard was also served upon on 20.3.2021 through his counsel but due to his illness and Corona Pandemic complaint could not be filed. Hence, this complaint seeking direction to the op to make refund of the amount of Rs.1300/- i.e. cost of sleeper and also to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation for their unforgivable conduct and also to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.       On notice, op appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action and concealment of true and material facts, so she is not entitled to get any compensation. It is submitted that true facts of the case are that the complainant has purchased a pair of sleeper in January, 2019 for a sum of Rs.650/- and at that time it was categorically told that there will be no guarantee/ warranty of said sleeper and it was also made sure to the complainant that the product was local brand and the answering op will have no responsibility for running the sleeper in future. After using the sleeper for more than two months, complainant approached the op for replacing the sleeper as the sleeper was not of her choice. The answering op with intention to keep/ retain the customer replaced the same with new sleeper on 1.4.2019 and same was taken by complainant herself from the shop of op. It is further submitted that it is relevant to mention here that at the time of purchase no guarantee has been given to the complainant and now after using the sleepers for more than two years she has filed this complaint on false and frivolous ground just to harass the op, so she is not entitled to get any kind of relief from this Forum (now Commission). It is further submitted that complainant has not annexed/ shown any damage report and has not produced the sleepers in the Commission, so she is not entitled to get any relief. On merits, the contents of complaint are denied to be wrong, pleas of preliminary objections are reiterated and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.

4.       Complainant has tendered her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, affidavit of Smt. Prem Lata Garg Ex.RW2/A, legal notice Ex.R1 and postal receipt Ex.R2.

5.       On the other hand, op has tendered affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Kumar as Ex.RW1/A.

6.       We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.  

7.       The complainant alleges that she purchased pair of sleeper from the shop of op about 8/9 months ago from filing of present complaint but she has failed to disclose specifically that on which date she purchased the sleepers in question from the op. Further more, complainant alleges that she purchased the sleepers for a sum of Rs.1300/- about 8/9 months ago from filing of present complaint which has been filed on 13.9.2021 which means in the month of December, 2020/ January 2021 but the op has taken a specific stand that complainant purchased the sleepers in the month of January, 2019 for a sum of Rs.650/- only and not for Rs.1300/- and it was made clear to her that there will no guarantee/ warrantee of said sleeper as sleeper is of local brand. The op has further taken the specific plea that after using the sleeper for more than two months, complainant approached to them for replacement of said pair of sleeper as same was not of her choice and op as a goodwill gesture and to retain the customer replaced the same with new sleeper on 1.4.2019 and said replaced sleeper has been used by her for more than two years and therefore, complaint is false and frivolous and has been filed only to harass the op. Since, for filing a consumer complaint, it was necessary for the complainant to produce on record bill of the purchase of sleeper but complainant has failed to produce any bill but despite that op has admitted that complainant purchased the sleeper of local brand from him in the month of January, 2019 but not in the month of December, 2020/ January, 2021 as alleged by complainant and op has also averred that sleeper which were of local brand and were purchased for only Rs.650/- and not for Rs.1300/- as alleged by complainant and were not having any guarantee/ warranty but still op replaced the same with new one on 1.4.2019, the op seems to be bonafide in this regard. As the sleeper purchased by complainant in 2019 has already been replaced/ exchanged by op with new one as per its written statement and affidavit and complainant has failed to establish on record that she actually purchased sleeper in the month of December 2020/ January, 2021 and not in January, 2019, therefore, complainant has failed to prove on record any deficiency of service on the part of op. The complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint by her own act and conduct as she has concealed the fact that sleeper has already been replaced with new one by op and a person who is seeking equity must come with equity.

8.       Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs.         A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.        

Announced:                             Member     Member               President,

Dated: 10.08.2022.                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                                            Redressal Commission, Sirsa.