IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 4th day of December, 2014.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member-I)
Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member-II)
C.C.No.132/2014 (Filed on 25.09.2014)
Between:
K.M. Abraham,
Kulamadayil Veedu,
Pazhavangadi.P.O.,
Ranny Thaluk.
(By Adv.N.V. Binu) ….. Complainant
And:
Pushpa Babu,
Mini Vilasom,
Velliyara.P.O.,
Ayroor Vilage,
Ranni Taluk. ….. Opposite party
O R D E R
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President):
Complainant approached this Forum for getting a relief against the opposite party from this Forum.
2. Brief facts of this complaint is as follows:- Opposite party is an agency for providing home nurses to those who are required the service of home nurses. Accordingly the complainant approached the opposite party for getting the services of a home nurse for assisting the complainant’s wife who is suffering from certain illness. As desired by the complainant, opposite party provided one home nurse by name Kamala on 19-09-2012 for 3 months. As per the terms and conditions the complainant has to deposit Rs.7,000/- as advance salary for 1 month and Rs.1,500/- as the service charges of the opposite party and he has to pay the remaining salary for the next 2 months directly to the home nurse. Accordingly he paid Rs.8,500/- to the opposite party. Further opposite party assured that they will provide the services of the home nurse without interruption for the contracted period of 3 months by providing substitutes for the days of leave taken by Kamala. The opposite party also issued the receipt for the payment of Rs.8,500/- and the agreement/consent letter. The said Kamala was in house of the complainant till 19-10-2012 and left by saying that she will return tomorrow. At the time she also collected salary of Rs.7000/- from the complainant. But she has not returned on the next day and for few other days also. So the complainant immediately contacted the opposite party and informed that the nurse was left and she is not returned and further requested for arranging another nurse as per the terms and conditions and as per the assurance of the opposite party. But the opposite party has not provided anybody for the complainant in spite of the complainants repeated request. Because of the above said act of the opposite party, the complainant and his wife were put to irreparable injury and losses due to the absence of the home nurse. Further the opposite party has not returned the deposited of Rs.8,000/- also in spite of the complainant’s repeated demand. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and opposite party is liable to the complainant for the same. Hence this complaint for the realization of a total amount of Rs.38,000/- under various heads including the amount retained by the opposite party and compensation and cost.
3. On the basis of the pleadings in the complaint, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
4. The evidence of this complaint consists of the oral deposition of PW1 and Ext.A1and A2. After closure of evidence, complainant was heard.
5. The point :- The complainant’s allegation is that opposite party being a service provider for providing home nurse and accordingly opposite party provided an home nurse to the complainant for 3 months after receiving their service charges of Rs.1,500/- and Rs.7,000/- being one month salary advance assuring to provide substitutes in case of absence of the nurse provided to him. But in spite of the said assurances, the home nurse came to his house, left after 30 days. Thereafter, nobody was provided by the opposite party in spite of the complainant’s repeated demands. Further the opposite party has not returned the advance salary and the service charges. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and hence the complainant was put to irreparable injury and losses. So the opposite party is liable to the complainant for the same. Therefore, the complainant prays for allowing the complaint.
6. In order to prove the case of the complainant, complainant adduced oral evidence as PW1 and produced two documents which are marked as Exts.A1 and A2. Ext.A1 is the receipt dated 19-09-2012 for Rs.8,500/- issued by the opposite party in the name of the complainant. Ext.A2 is the consent letter dated 19-09-2012 issued by the opposite party showing the transaction between the complainant and the opposite party.
7. On the basis of the available materials on record, it is found that the opposite party provided a home nurse to the complainant for 3 months after accepting Rs.8,500/- as salary deposit and service charges. The allegation of the complainant is that the opposite party has not provided a substitute nurse irrespective of the assurance and in spite of the complainant’s request. Further the opposite party has not returned the advance deposit and the balance service charges. Since the opposite party is exparte, we find no reason to disbelieve the allegations of the complaint against the opposite party. Therefore, the complainant’s case stands proved as unchallenged. Hence we find that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and hence the opposite party is liable to the complainant. In the circumstances, this complaint is found allowable.
8. In the result, this complaint is allowed thereby the opposite party is directed to return Rs.8,000/- (Rupees Eight Thousand only) the advance salary deposit and the remaining service charges with 10% interest from 19-10-2012 along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the complainant within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize the whole amount ordered herein above with 12% interest from today till the realization of the whole amount.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 4th day of December, 2014.
(Sd/-)
Jacob Stephen,
(President)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member – I) : (Sd/-)
Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member – II) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : K.M. Abraham
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Receipt dated 19-09-2012 for Rs.8,500/- issued by the
opposite party in the name of the complainant.
A2 : Letter dated 19-09-2012 issued by the opposite party showing
the transaction between the complainant and the opposite
party.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party: Nil.
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent.
Copy to:- (1) K.M. Abraham, Kulamadayil Veedu,
Pazhavangadi.P.O., Ranny Thaluk.
(2) Pushpa Babu, Mini Vilasom, Velliyara.P.O.,
Ayroor Vilage, Ranni Taluk.
(3) The Stock File.
