Date of Filing : 26/12/2016
Order No. 9 dt. 01/12/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased one Estillo L Economy Sofa Set on 16.08.2015 from M/s Outpace Furniture (P) Ltd, Mani Square Mall, 164/1 Maniktola Main Road, Kolkata 700054. The sofa set had been used by the complainant with utmost care but while using it had been discharging a sound after use of eleven months. Complainant had also felt discomfort out of the foam, subsequently deformed, used in the sofa set. On 22.07.2016 complainant submitted a complaint with the o.p. regarding the issue and obtained a complaint no 5177.Thereafter complainant knocked the o.p. time and again. But after perennial waiting for 25 days complainant took intervention of mediation wing of the Asstt. Director, CA&FBP, 24-Parganas South R.O. for amicable solution of the case. But before the mediation meeting to be held on 22.11.2016 op sent one of his skilled personnel for repairing of the sofa set. But after repairing of the sofa set discharging of noise could not be managed to subdue the sound wholly. Even after repair the sofa set required more repair by replacing the wood structure used in mounting the foam and the covering cloth at the bottom. In the mediation meeting no fruitful result had been derived out. Finding no other alternative complainant lodged this complaint praying for direction upon the o.p. to replace the sofa set or refused the purchase value amounting to Rs.34,200/- with interest along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost by any amount as to be determined by the Forum.
PR & TR shows that notice had been served upon o.p, but the o.p. did not appear in the Forum for participation in the proceedings. So, the case has been proceeded ex-parte against the o.p.
On the basis of the pleadings of the complainant following points are to be decided:-
- Whether there was any defect in the goods/ deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of fact.
We have gone through the submission of the complainant and evidences on record. It is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased one Sofa Set on 16.08.2015 from op. The sofa set had been used by the complainant for 11 months only and there after it had been discharging a sound while using by sitting on it. Complainant had also felt discomfort out of the foam, subsequently deformed, used in the sofa set. On 22.07.2016 complainant submitted a complaint with the o.p. regarding the problem .But op did not respond to the call of the complainant immediately or even during the following period of one month. Complainant compelled to take the help of mediation wing of the CA&FBP Directorate, 24-Parganas South R.O. for amicable solution of the case. In the mediation meeting no fruitful result had been derived out.
But just before the mediation meeting to be held on 22.11.2016 op sent one of his skilled personnel for repairing of the sofa set. The notice received from the Asst Director had made the op active enough in undertaking the repair job or to show their gesture towards the consumer. But after repairing of the sofa set, discharging of noise could not be managed to be subdued by annihilating the root cause. Even after repair, the sofa set required more repair by replacing a portion of the wood structure used for the purpose of mounting the foam in question and the covering cloth at the bottom. Complainant has tried to get the sofa repaired by the op but op failed to utilize the scope by repairing it up to the mark.
In order to prove the case the complainant sworn an affidavit of evidence in support of the contention of the complaint and filed the documents in support of his claim including the photocopy of the bill of the op.Due to unchallenged testimony of the complaint there is no scope to disbelieve the submission of the complainant and therefore it should be accepted and necessary order is to be passed accordingly.
Thus, there was shortcomings in the sofa set as well as deficiency in service on the part of the op. On the basis of the evidences on record and since no challenge has been made by o.p. to controvert the demand of the complainant we, therefore, have no other alternative but to accept the case of the complainant. Thus the case is disposed of accordingly disposing all points.
Hence, it is ordered.
That the case no.533/2016 is allowed ex-parte with cost against the o.p. The o.p. is directed to pay a sum of Rs.34,200/-(Rupees thirty-four thousand two hundred) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-(Rupees three thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization. Complainant is also directed to return the sofa set to the op immediately on receiving the awarded amount.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
