Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/74/2016

Simranjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

OM SAI Ayurveda - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Pritpal Singh Syan

29 Nov 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                         Consumer Complaint No.74 of 2016

                                                                Date of institution: 03.08.2016                                        

                                                              Date of decision   : 29.11.2016

Simranjit Singh son of Sh. Netar Singh, resident of village Barwali Kalan, Tehsil Khamanon, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

……..Complainant

Versus

Om Sai Ayurveda, India Limited, 3^rd Floor, GRM Complex, Main Rohtak Road, Nagloi, 110041, New Delhi India through its Manager/Chairman.

 

 …..Opposite party

     

Complaint under Sections 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986

Quorum

 

Smt. Veena Chahal, Member           

Sh. Amar Bhushan Aggarwal, Member

         

Present :      Sh. P.S.Syan, Adv.Cl. for the complainant.

                   Opposite party exparte.

 

ORDER

By Amar Bhushan Aggarwal, Member

                Complainant, Simranjit Singh son of Sh. Netar Singh, resident of village Barwali Kalan, Tehsil Khamanon, District Fatehgarh Sahib, has filed this complaint against the Opposite party (hereinafter referred to as “the OP”) under Sections 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.              The complainant read an advertisement in the Newspaper i.e. Jagbani regarding the product of OP, namely; Vikash Amrit. The employee of OP, namely; Harmeet Kaur, assured the complainant that the said product will work within 45 days of its regular use and if the same did not given any positive effect, then the money of the complainant will be refunded.  On assurance of OP, the complainant purchased the said product from OP for his wife and paid an amount of Rs.9,000/-. The product was delivered to the complainant at his residence on cash delivery service. The wife of the complainant used the said product regularly as per the instructions of OP but it did not give any response.  The complainant informed the OP through a letter dated 11.02.2016 and also contacted the OP telephonically. The OP demanded the original bill and product, which were forwarded to OP through courier on 22.02.2016 but OP did not refund the money. The complainant also sent reminder dated 11.02.2016 but it did not sent any reply to the same. Thereafter, the complainant many times requested the OP to refund the amount but it remained putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 18.03.2016 upon the OP but in vain. Hence, this complaint for giving directions to the OP to refund amount of Rs.9,000/- i.e. price of the said product, Rs.50,000/- as compensation for unnecessary harassment and mental pain and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.

3.             Notice of the complaint was issued to the OP but it chose not to appear to contest this complaint despite service. Hence, OP was proceeded against exparte.

4.             In order to prove his case the complainant tendered in evidence copy of bill Ex. C-1, copy of receipt of courier Ex. C-2, copy of letter dt.11.02.2016 Ex. C-3, copy of legal notice Ex. C-4, copy of postal receipt Ex. C-5, his affidavit Ex. C-6, copy of letter dated 22.02.2016 mark-A and copy of advertisement mark- B and closed the evidence.

5.             The Ld. counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant had purchased the product, vide bill No.81835 dated 28.12.2015 for Rs.9,000/- after reading the advertisement in the newspaper and after discussion with the employee of the company. It was used as per instructions of the company but it did not give any result. After use for 45 days, when there was no response, company was told about this. The company asked the complainant to send back the medicine along with the original bill, which were returned as per directions of the company. After that a letter was written to the company on 22.02.2016 and then a legal notice dated 18.03.2016 was served up on the company to refund the amount but there was no reply nor refund was received. Thus, the OP has committed grave deficiency in service and indulged in unfair trade practice. The Ld. counsel thus pleaded for acceptance of his complaint and heavy penalty be imposed on the OP.

6.             The OP was proceeded against ex-parte as despite the proper and effective service, it did not join the proceedings at any stage. This in itself is an admission of the complaint on their part.

7.             After hearing the Ld. counsel for the complainant and going through the pleadings, evidence produced and the oral arguments, we find that there is force in the submissions of the Ld. counsel for the complainant.

8.             In view of the above discussion, we accept the present complaint and that the OP has committed deficiency in service and also indulged in unfair trade practice since the medicine did not give result as per their claim in the advertisement, which was thus a misleading advertisement. Thus, we direct the OP to:

a)    refund the amount of Rs.9,000/- along with interest of 8% w.e.f.22.02.2016, the date of return till realization.

b)    the complainant is also held entitled to the damages suffered by him on account of harassment, mental tension, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice to the tune of Rs.5,000/- including cost of litigation.

 The refund amount alonwith damages/compensation cost be paid within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

9.             The arguments on the complaint were heard on 17.11.2016 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.    

Pronounced

Dated: 29.11.2016

                                                                                (Veena Chahal)

Member

 

(A.B.Aggarwal)

Member