DOF.15.5.2009 DOO.6/8 /2010 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President Smt.K.P.Preethakumari: Member Smt.M.D.Jessy: Member Dated this, the 6th day of August 2010 CC.297/2009 Damodaran.T.V., Thaivalappil, Blathur, P.O.Kalliad, Irikkur. Complainant Owner, KottaramVasthralayam, Main Road, Sreekandapuram. (Rep. by Adv.V.S.Satheesh) Opposite Party O R D E R Sri.K.Gopalan, President This is a complaint filed under section12 of consumer protection act for an order directing the opposite party to pay Rs.10, 000/- as compensation The case of the complainant is that he has purchased a piece of cloth for churidar on 17.8.09 by paying an amount of Rs.225/- on the assurance by the opposite party that the colour will not be faded. Churidar was stitched with that cloth. But when this churidar was put to water for wash it lost its colour and faded with ugly look and it could not used to wear. The material was in a different colour. Thereafter when it was taken to opposite party on 9.9.09 and complained of the owner took the material back and assured to return back immediately within a week after sending it to the company. Then it was endorsed on the back of the bill issued by the Kottarm Vastralayam, sreekandapuram. He was also told that if he calls after a week over phone he will be informed the exact date when he will get back the churidar. So complainant returned home. When the complainant called after one week he was asked to give him phone number to call him back to inform the date of delivery. Complainant contacted the shop several time but there was no result. When the complainant directly went to shop he was insulted and told him to find his own way to get back the churidar. Hence this complaint. Forum sent notice to opposite party. He was properly served and acknowledgment returned. Opposite party was called absent and set exparte. Subsequently petition filed to set aside the exparte order and petition allowed. Version filed by the opposite party but after cross examination of the complainant opposite party remained absent to avoid adducing evidence. The contention raised by the opposite party in brief is as follows: 5 meters cloth is purchased ie. very low quality cloth worth only Rs.225/-. The sales men newer told the complainant that the cloth is high quality. Salesmen had also not given any assurance with respect to the fading of colour. If the colour faded most probably it is either duet to over use of detergent or due to hand wash over the stone. There is no obligation on the part of opposite party to take back the sold articles and exchange the same. He has told to the complainant only that if the company gives the same the churidar will be exchanged. But manufacturing company was not ready to do so. Complainant has no such loss as is stated in the complaint. This complaint is only to disturb the opposite party. Hence to dismiss the complaint. The main question that arose for consideration is whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite party or not? It is an admitted case that the complainant has purchased the churidar from the shop of the opposite party “Kottaram Vasthralayam, Sreekandapuram. Ext.A1 proves that the price of the churidar purchased from opposite party worth of Rs.225/-. The complainant’s case is that when the churidar was washed its colour faded and the material became useless. When it was returned that was taken back endorsing (Ext.A1 (a)) the same on the back of Ext.A1 and assured to return after one week. All attempts were failed and churidar was not returned by the opposite party. Complainant adduced evidence as PW1. PW1 was cross examined for opposite party but did not brought out anything contrary to the complainant’s case. Opposite party admitted that it is returned. He is under the impression that if company is not giving or exchanging new cloth he has no liability to find any remedy for this problem. Complainant has no other go except approaching the opposite party for the remedy but opposite party reluctant to give a new churidar. It can be seen that the cloth became useless by the first wash itself. When complainant was blamed on using detergent as if they were using detergent first time. There is no meaning in it until it is proved. Opposite party was not ready to give evidence. There is no reason to disbelieve the complainant. Complainant is a police constable. It is difficult to believe that he has lodged this complaint to harass the opposite party. The way in which the opposite party conducted the case itself reveals that there is some substance in the subject mater in dispute. Opposite party remained absent at the time of his evidence. It shows his contentions have no footing. The available evidence is infavour of complainant. Opposite party himself has admitted the case of the complainant to a great extent. Opposite party’s assumption that the colour fading is due to using of excess detergent cannot be taken into account to make him free from liability. He has even failed to discharge his legal obligation to defend his case properly. In the light of above discussion and taking in to account the entire aspect we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and he is liable to return the cost of the cloth of churidar, its stitching cost and the cost of this litigation. We feel that a sum of Rs.750/- will meet the end of justice. The opposite party is liable to pay a sum of rs.750/- to the complainant and we order so. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.750/-(Rupees Seven hundred and fifty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which complainant is entitled to execute the order as per the provisions of consumer protection act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1.Invoice issued by OP dt.17.8.09 Exhibits for the opposite party: nil Witness examined for the complainant PW1.Complainannt Witness examined for the opposite party: Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur
| | [HONORABLE PREETHAKUMARI.K.P] Member[HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE JESSY.M.D] Member | | 
