O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-      The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking replacement  of chappals purchased by him; Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony, legal expenses and for costs.   

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

          The complainant on 23-02-14 purchased “Zodie “chappals from the opposite party for Rs.430/- vide bill No.68.  One month after purchase the chappals purchased by the complainant got damaged.  The complainant on 25-03-14 gave the said chappals to the opposite party for repair.  The opposite party for the reasons best known to him returned those chappals on 05-04-14 without repair.  The complainant on 01-05-14 issued notice to the opposite party for replacement of above chappals and the notice addressed the opposite party was returned.  The opposite party delivered inferior quality of chappals and it amounted to deficiency of service.  The complainant therefore be allowed. 

3.      The opposite party after receiving summons remained exparte. 

4.  Exs.A-1 to A-3 were marked on behalf of the complainant,  

5.   Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

1.       Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?

2.       Whether the complainant is entitled to damages? 

3.       To what relief? 

6.   POINT No.1:- Ex.A-1 revealed that the complainant purchased “ Zodie” chappals for Rs.430/- on 23-02-14 from the opposite party.  The complainant got issued Ex.A-2 notice on 01-05-14 requiring him to replace the chappals purchased under Ex.A-1   .  The notice addressed to the opposite party returned as “absent” (Ex-A3).  The addressed mentioned on Ex.A-1 and A-3 registered post cover is one and the same.  Under those circumstances an inference can be drawn that the opposite party had knowledge of the complainant sending notice. 

7.      Ex.A-1 did not contain any warranty regarding quality and duration.  But Ex.A-1 it was mentioned “A house of quality foot wear”.  By such advertisement the opposite party is attracting buyers.   As the opposite party remained exparte the contention of the complainant about chappals becoming damaged within a month after purchase remained uncontraverted.  Considering the advertisement mentioned on Ex.A-1 “A house of quality foot wear” it can be inferred that the opposite party under Ex-A1 sold inferior quality of” Zodie “chappals.  In view of the afore mentioned discussion delivery of chappals of inferior quality in our considered opinion amounted to deficiency in service.  We therefore answer this point infavour of the complainant. 

8.   POINT No.2:- The complainant claimed Rs.20,000/- as damages for the inconvenience he suffered.  The Supreme Court in Sujatha Nath Vs Popular Nursing Home and others (civil appeal No.8642/11 dated 14-10-11) affirmed the view taken by the National Commission that the compensation claimed and which can be awarded by the Fora for such negligence and deficiency to be commensurate with the loss and injury suffered.  The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Kumari Femi and others Vs Dr.Kavitha V.K. and others 2013 (1) CPR 85 (NC) reiterated the above decision.  The amount Rs.20,000/- claimed by the complainant towards mental agony and legal expenses is highly exaggerated.  Considering the loss or inconvenience suffered by the complainant awarding a sum of Rs.500/- will meet ends of justice.  We therefore answer this point accordingly infavour of the complainant. 

9.  POINT No.3:   In view of findings, in the result the complaint is allowed in part as indicated below: 

1.       The opposite party is directed to repair the chappals sold under Ex.A-1 within a week of receipt of this order; if repair is not possible the opposite party is directed to return an amount of Rs.430/- (Rupees four hundred and thirty only) to the complainant.   

2.       The opposite party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) to the complainant as compensation. 

3.       The opposite party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the complaint. 

          The above order shall be complied within one weeks from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the amounts order it item No.1 shall carry interest @9% p.a. from the date of order till realization. 

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 25^th day of July, 2014.

  -sd                                                    -sd-                                                     -sd-

MEMBER                                 MEMBER                                          PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party:-  NIL

                                                                                                                             -sd-

PRESIDENT

NB:   The parties are required to collect the extra sets within a month after receipt of this order either personally or through their advocate as otherwise the extra sets shall be weeded out.