Date of Filing:19.06.2009<br /> Date of Order:03.11.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1428 OF 2009<br /> <br /> Mrs. Awasthy,<br /> No. 1002, Block 9, <br /> Sun City Apartments,<br /> Sarjapur Outer Ring Road,<br /> Bangalore. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> Pro Handyman India Ltd.,<br /> No. 17, 11th main, II Stage, <br /> Domlur, Bangalore-56003. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant stating that she is residing at Sun City Sarjapur in Flat No.1002. The opposite party representative visited her premises on 16/05/2009 and offered to maintain services for all the household electronic items and she has paid Rs. 4,990/- by cheque dated 16/05/2009 and she has produced the receipt issued by the opposite party. From then onwards the complainant has been calling the office of opposite party and there was no response from the opposite party side. In view of this the complainant strongly feels that opposite party company is a bogus company and trying to make money from the clients without rendering service. Therefore, the complainant requested to help her to recover amount paid by her with compensation for mental strain etc.,<br /> 2. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party. Notice was served on the opposite party. On behalf of opposite party, Sri. MCH Advocate filed vakalath on 24/07/2009 and took time to file defence version. The case was adjourned to 18/08/2009, on that date defence version was not filed. Again case was adjourned to 09/09/2009, on that date opposite party was not present and it was taken that defence version not filed. Thereafter, the complainant is appearing personally and her submissions are heard and perused the documents. <br /> 3. In the light of the arguments advanced before us following points arise for consideration:<br /> 1. Whether the complaint is entitled for refund of the amount paid by her?<br /> <br /> 2. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 4. The complainant has produced Xerox copy of the cheque given to the opposite party which was dated 16/05/2009. The cheque amount is Rs.4,990-. The complainant has produced broacher of the opposite party company. The complainant has written letter to the opposite party requesting to refund the amount. Since after receiving the amount nobody from the company visited her house and her repeated phone calls never answered and as per the conditions and broacher the opposite party company suppose to attend all the electric appliances repair work of the complainant for a period of one year. The opposite party company received the amount of Rs. 4,990- for the said service, but unfortunately the opposite party company never visited the house of complainant after receiving the amount. The complainant tried to contact the company over phone but there was no response. She had written letter withdrawing the membership and demanded the refund. For that letter also there was no response. Therefore, the complainant was forced to file this complaint before this Forum seeking refund of the amount with compensation. The opposite party company has received the amount without giving any service. Therefore, it is clear case of a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The case put up by the complainant has gone unchallenged. The opposite party company though appeared through counsel has failed to file defence version. Therefore, the case and the facts stated by the complainant shall have to be accepted as true and correct. It is just, fair and reasonable to direct the opposite party to refund Rs.4,990/- to the complainant with 9% interest p.a from 16/05/2009 till payment. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation it is intended to protect better interest of the consumers. The complainant being a consumer under the C.P Act, her interest requires to be protected by ordering the opposite party to refund the amount since there was no service provided to complainant as promised. The complainant has prayed for granting compensation for mental strain and harassment. On the facts of the case this is not a fit case to grant compensation for mental agony. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> 5. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party company is directed to refund Rs. 4,990/- to the complainant along with 9% interest p.a from 16/05/2009 till payment/realisation. <br /> <br /> 6. The complainant is also entitled Rs.1,000/- as cost of the present proceedings from the opposite party. <br /> <br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately as a statutory requirement. <br /> <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br /> <br />