KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

APPEAL No: 42/2008

JUDGMENT DATED:27-07-2010

PRESENT:

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU              :PRESIDENT

SHRI.S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR                             : MEMBER

Frijo Paul, sole Proprietor,

Merzecool, Angel Towers,

Shornur Road, Thrissur Village,                                    : APPELLANT

Thrissur Taluk, Thrissur Dist.

PIN – 680001.

(By Adv:Sri.G.S.Kalkura)

            Vs.

N.K. Shreedharan, S/o Nembanath Krishnan,

Ayyanthole village, Thrissur Taluk

Thrissur Dist. (DIED)

(By Adv:Sri. Shrikumar Nambanath)

Additional Respondents.

                                                                                                : RESPONDENTS

1.         K.K.Rajeswaray,

W/o late N.K. Shreedharan, Nambanath Veedu,

Ayyanthole village, Thrissur Taluk

Thrissur Dist.

2.         Sreeja Shivdas, D/o N.K. Shreedharan

Vazhoor Complex,Ayyanthole village,

Thrissur Taluk, Thrissur Dist.

3.         Sreekumaran Nambanath, S/o N.K. Shreedharan

Nambanath Veedu, Ayyanthole village,

Thrissur Taluk, Thrissur Dist.

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU:PRESIDENT

The appellant is the opposite party in CC.1192/05 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur.  The appellants are under orders to provide a split A.C 0.80 ton capacity of Videocon to the complainant on receiving Rs.3900/- and also to pay Rs.1500/- towards cost.

2. Both sides were represented.

3. It is the case of the complainant that on seeing the advertisement in the Malayala Manorama daily dated:6/10/2005 that a split A.C of 0.80 ton will be provided for a price of Rs.3900/- with a warranty of 6 years.  He sent his lady clerk with a cheque for the above amount to the shop of the opposite party.  The cheque was not received by the opposite party nor was the A.C delivered.  Lawyer notice was issued but no reply was sent by the opposite parties.

4. According to the opposite parties the advertisement was only an invitation and it was also mentioned in the advertisement that the balance has to be paid in instalments.

5. The evidence adduced consisted of Exts.P1 to P3.

6. The Forum has noted that the balance to be paid in instalments is mentioned in the advertisement not in a visible manner. 

Further there was only a minute asterisk above the amount mentioned prominently ie Rs.3900/- and that nobody will notice the asterisk.  Copy of the advertisement was shown to us by the counsel representing the respondent herein.  The advertisement is the same as noted by the Forum.  We find that such advertisements amounts to unfair trade practice.  The complainant had taken the trouble to reach the showroom of the opposite party along with the cheque and was sent back.  In the circumstances we find that the complainant is liable to be compensated although not in the manner directed by the Forum.  In the circumstances the order of the Forum directing to deliver the split A.C for a sum of Rs.3900/- is set aside.  The opposite parties/appellants are directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation with interest at 12% from the date of complaint.  The order to pay cost of Rs.1500/- is sustained.  The amounts are to be paid within  two  months from  the date  of  receipt  of this order failing

which the complainant would be entitled for interest at 15% from today.

The office will forward a copy of this order to the Forum.

JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU:PRESIDENT

S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER

VL.