Order by:

Smt.Priti Malhotra, President

1.       The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 stating that complainant has purchased the Iron Gate for a sum of Rs.13,500/- from Opposite Party vide cash memo dated 10.08.2023. The Opposite Party assured that the said iron gate is OK and same is guaranteed for a period of two years and if there is any defect occurred, they will either replace or repair it. Alleged that soon after its purchase, the complainant found that the said gate is not perfect due to following reasons:-

i)       The material used in the said gate was of low quality.

ii)      The finishing of the said gate got damaged.

iii)     The lock installed in the said gate is not working properly.

iv)     The Opposite Party charged excess amount than the prevalent in the market.

v)      The Opposite Party has charged GST, but not added in the said bill.

Alleged further that the complainant visited the office of Opposite Party, but all in vain. The complainant also issued legal notice dated 05.08.2024 upon the Opposite Party, but to no effect.  Due to the aforesaid illegal and unwarranted acts of the Opposite Party, the complainant has suffered mental tension and harassment. Hence, this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Party may be directed to replace the gate in question or to refund the amount of gate i.e. Rs.13,500/- alongwith interest thereon.

b)      To pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and harassment.

c)       And any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper be granted to the complainant in the interest of justice and equity.

2.       Notice of the complaint was duly sent to Opposite Party, but despite service of notice none appeared on behalf of Opposite Party. As such, Opposite Party is proceeded against exparte vide order dated 04.11.2024.

3.       In order to prove the case, the complainant has placed on record copies of documents Ex.C1 & Ex.C2, his affidavit as Ex.C3 and copies of photographs of gate in question Ex.C4 to Ex.C6.

4.       We have heard the complainant in person and carefully gone through the record.

5.       The case of the complainant is that he purchased one Iron Gate for an amount of Rs.13,500/- from the Opposite Party, through cash memo dated 10.08.2023 (Ex.C2). However, after few days of its purchase, the complainant found that the said gate is not property built as the material used in the said gate was of low quality, finishing of the said gate got damaged after few days and lock installed in the said gate is also not working properly. The complainant approached the Opposite Party with a request to repair or replace the gate in question, but the Opposite Party failed to do any needful.

6.       During the course of arguments, complainant submitted that despite repeated requests, the Opposite Party did not turn up to remove the defect occurred in the gate in question not it is responding to the requests made even despite service of legal notice in this regard. Submitted further that main lock of the gate in question is also not operative properly, thus causing lot of harassment. Claimed further that he is facing undue hardship due to the defects in the gate in question and requested for the refund of the amount spent by him on the gate.

7.       To corroborate his aforesaid assertion, the Complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C3 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1, Ex.C2, Ex.C4 to Ex.C6. The Opposite party neither replied to the legal notice nor opt to appear and contest the proceedings, hence aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted and unchallenged through any cogent and convincing evidence on record.  In this way, the Opposite party has impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite party has no defence to counter and also is reluctant to cater the complainant for the removal of the defects occurred in the gate in question.    

8.       So, from the entire unrebutted and unchallenged  evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that  the Opposite party has adopted unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by not repairing or replacing the Gate of the complainant in question within the reasonable period from the date of purchase of the gate in question.  

9.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the present complaint in part and direct the Opposite Party to make refund of the price of the Gate in question i.e. Rs.13,500/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant, subject to return of Gate in question by the complainant. Opposite Party is also directed to pay compository costs of Rs.2500/-(Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Party within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the Opposite Party is burdened with additional cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) to be paid to complainant for non compliance of the order.  Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.  

Announced in Open Commission.