1. JIMMY KORAH 2. K.Anirudhan 3. Smt;Shajitha Beevi
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER) Sri. B. Narayanankutty, the complainant have filed the complainant before this Forum alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The contentions order for Rs.42,000/- to Sri. B. Mohandas. Proprietor M/s. Polymould India to supply certain furniture items. Only after 2 months, the opposite party has supplied Dining table and chair to the complainant. But after two months the above said supplied items became defective due to certain small insects. The complainant has informed the opposite party about that matter. As such, the opposite party sent certain workers to the residence of the complainant. The workers applying certain oil in the furniture items and left the place. But the defects in the furniture items were not cured. The complainant informed these matters to the opposite party. But he has not turned up. On different dates, the opposite party had collected a total Rs.29,500/- by cash and wood having value for Rs.6000/- as advance. But the opposite party has not supplied the ordered items of Crockery Shelf, in spite of repeated requests, even after the laps of 10 months. Finally the complainant has not agreeable to accept the crockery shelf which was furnished for the supply to the complainant, since it was not in the specification given by the complainant and at that time, the complainant demanded back the advanced payments received by the opposite party. The opposite party agreed to repay the amounts within 3 months. But, the opposite party has not turned up in repaying the money. Hence the present complaint charging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite party and he entered before the Forum and filed version and counter claim. Complainant filed proof affidavit and filed 5 documents in evidence marked as Exts.A1 to A5. Opposite party has not filed any documents in evidence. In the version, the opposite party has stated that, for the Dining table and for chair, Rs.15,600/- was agreed and for remaining items for Crockery shelf was charged for Rs.26,800/- together with the sum of Rs.6000/- for the wood items kept in the house of the complainant was agreed by with parties. It is further stated that the defects noted in the items were quite natural phenomena. But the crockery shelf was furnished and ready for supply to the complainant. But the complainant denied to take delivery items raising certain objection. But it was furnished with the specification supplied by the complainant. 4. Considering the rival contentions of the parties, this Forum raised the issues:- (1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? (2) Compensation and costs. 5. Ext.A1 produced by the complainant shows that on 30.12.2004 the opposite party has accepted a sum of Rs.7500/- from the complainant. Ext.A2 document shows that the opposite party has received a sum of Rs.5000/- from the complainant. Ext.A3 document showing the acceptance of Rs.2000/- from the complainant by the opposite party. Total amount as per Exts.A1 to A3 comes to Rs.14,500/- . In addition to this amount, he opposite party was taken wood for the complainant worth Rs.6000/-, total comes to Rs.20,500/- in connection with the supply of furniture items. Opposite party has not produced any documents to show the clearance of above amount which was paid as advance amounts for the supply of crockery shelf to the complainant by the opposite party. Ext.A4 document showing the total amount for the supply of item at the time giving order. Ext.A5 is the letter of the Consumer Protection Council dated 29.10.05 showing the complaint against the opposite party filed by the complainant. 6. On perusal of the above documents given, in evidence and complaint, version and all other matters and after a detailed hearing, we are of the view that by delay of supply of crockery table and supply of defective items of furniture to the complainant, there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. 1st Point issue is found in favour of the complainant. Since there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant is entitled to get compensation and cost. In the result, we direct the opposite party to pay back the advance amount of Rs.13,900/- (Rupees thirteen thousand and nine hundred only) collected from the complainant on different dates, together with the cost of wood which comes to Rs.6000/- (Rupees six thousand only) with 10% interest and a compensation of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) and cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only). We further direct the opposite party to pay the above said amounts to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of May, 2008. Sd/- SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN : Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH : Sd/- SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI: APPENDIX:- Evidence of the complainant:- Ext.A1 - Receipt for Rs.7500/- Ext.A2 - Receipt for Rs.5000/- Ext.A3 - Receipt for Rs.2000/- Ext.A4 - Copy of the order/quotation dtd. 28.10.2004 Ext.A5 - Notice dated 29.10.2005 Evidence of the opposite party:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Oppo. Party/S.F. Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-
