D.O.F. 20.08.2010 D.O.O. 29.01.2011 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 29th day of January, 2011. C.C.No.210/2010 Prasanna Soman, W/o. Late Soman, Lakshmi Sadan, : Complainant Dharmadam, Thalassery, Kannur Distict (Rep. by Adv. K. Viswan ) The Proprietor, Clean, Snow White, : Opposite party Rubin Plaza, Near Municipal Office, Thalassery. O R D E R Sri. K. Gopalan, President. This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to pay ` 15,000 as compensation together with the cost of this litigation. The facts of the case in brief are as follows : Complainant approached the opposite party and delivered two saree worth of ` 4500 each for dry cleaning on 18.12.2009. Opposite party received 150 towards the charge and issued a bill. As promised complainant approached the opposite party on 28.12.2009 to get the washed sarees. She delivered only one saree. There after complainant repeatedly requested to give the second saree. At last he redelivered the second saree as damaged. Complainant was really shocked to see the damaged saree. The complainant has sent registered lawyer notice on 19.03.2010 to the opposite party demanding compensation of ` 15,000 for the mental agony and for the cost of the saree. The opposite party refused to accept the notice and the same returned. It is because of the gross negligence on the part of opposite party that the second saree was damaged. After receiving the complaint Forum sent notice to opposite party but it was returned unclaimed. Opposite party remained absent. Subsequently opposite party was called absent and set exparte. Thereafter exparte evidence has been taken and Ext.A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant. The complainants case is that she has entrusted opposite party two sarees worth of ` 4,500 each for dry cleaning. Opposite party delivered after dry cleaning one saree on the promised day. After the repeated request of the complainant opposite party re-delivered the other saree but damaged. The saree became damaged only due to gross negligence on the part of opposite party. Complainant filed chief affidavit in tune with the pleadings. Ext.A1 is the receipt for ` 150 for the charge of dry cleaning of two sarees. This document proves that two sarees were entrusted with the opposite party for dry cleaning. Ext.A2 is the copy of the legal notice and Ext.A3 is the returned legal notice with entrustment unclaimed by opposite party. Complainant adduced evidence by way of chief affidavit that she has entrusted two sarees worth of ` 4,500 with opposite party for dry cleaning and opposite party redelivered only one saree on the assured date. After several attempt the other saree was delivered to complainant but in damaged condition. Ext.A3 proves that opposite party refused to claim the legal notice sent by the complainant. The non-acceptance of registered legal notice together with other available evidence and his absence before the Forum throughout undoubtedly make it clear that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. In the light of the evidence adduced by the complainant by way of affidavit and the documents marked on his side established the case of complainant. The negligence on the part of opposite party is undoubtedly brought out. But the complainant failed to prove the exact price of the saree. No bill or any other evidence has been produced in order to prove the price of the saree. Even then it can be assumed that the material entrusted the opposite party is a costly saree. Hence we are under the impression that complainant is entitled altogether for an amount of ` 4,000 so as to meet her loss and sufferings suffered by the complainant. Hence it is ordered that opposite party is liable to pay ` 4,000 as compensation and an amount of ` 500 as cost of litigation. In the result complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay an amount of ` 4,000 (Rupees Four thousand only) as compensation including the price of saree together with an amount of ` 500 (Rupees Five hundred only) as cost of this litigation within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the 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. Bill dated 18.12.2009. A2. Lawyer notice dated 25.03.2010 A3. Registered letter dated 25.03.2010. Exhibits for the opposite party Nil Witness examined for the complainant Nil Witness examined for the opposite party Nil /forwarded by order/ SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
| | [HONORABLE PREETHAKUMARI.K.P] Member[HONORABLE MR. GOPALAN.K] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE JESSY.M.D] Member | | 
