Haryana

Ambala

CC/344/2023

ASHOK KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

ROY REFRIGERATION CENTRE. - Opp.Party(s)

L.R SAINI

16 Oct 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	344 of 2023
Date of Institution	:	22.11.2023
Date of decision	:	16.10.2024

 

Ashok Kumar aged about 62 years son of Sona Ram, resident of Saha, Tehsil Saha and District Ambala.

          ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

Roy Refrigeration Centre, 4/C/6, S.R. Dutta Sarani, Konnagar, Hoogly-712235 (West Bengal) Through its Proprietor/authorized signatory- Shri Gautam Roy.

….…. Opposite Party.

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:       Shri L.R. Saini, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                   OP already ex parte vide order dated 19.01.2024.                

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) praying for issuance of following directions to it:-

1. To replace the hardener of 22 gauge instead of 24 gauge and to replace the ice pad of working capacity of 15 hours.
2. To  refund the excess amount of Rs.13,000/-
3. To pay Rs.3,00,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.  
4. To pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation charges.

Or

Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the OP is doing the business of manufacturing of ice pad hardener, used for keeping the ice candy cool. For the purpose of purchase of one hardener, the complainant contacted the OP, in the month of April 2023 and after conversation on telephone, the OP sent the quotation alongwith the terms and conditions on 15.04.2023.  In the said quotation, the price of the hardener was mentioned as Rs.1,15,000/-, for one unit and as such, complainant agreed to purchase one unit of hardener.  In the said quotation, it was mentioned that the body of the hardener will be of Full G.I. body and 22 gauge G.I. sheet tank and with S.S. (304) door and Top, Compressor Tacoms 2495 with 19 x 22 x 4 row condenser. After sending the quotation, the OP asked the complainant to send the token money and accordingly, he sent Rs. 15,000/- on 17.04.2023 as token money which he transferred from his bank account to the bank account of the OP. It was promised by OP that the hardener will be sent till 25.04.2023 as there was peak season for ice candy and the complainant requested OP to send the same positively by 25.04.2023. When the OP failed to supply the hardener on 25.04.2023, the complainant requested the OP again and again to supply the same during the season of ice candy otherwise he will suffer a huge loss.  Again on 04.05.2023, the OP asked the complainant to send Rs.50,000/- and as such he immediately transferred the money in the account of  OP on 04.05.2023 itself and thereafter  it did not supply the hardener. The OP again asked the complainant to send money and on 09.05.2023 he transferred the amount of Rs. 8000/- and Rs.40,000/-, vide two transactions.  Thereafter, the OP sent the hardener vide invoice no.124 dated 12.05.2023. The OP sent hardener on 12.05.2023, which was received by the complainant after one week but it did not send the ice pad for use in the hardener.  Complainant again and again contacted the OP as without ice pad, the hardener is useless. OP again asked the complainant to send Rs.15,000/- and only after receipt of Rs.15000/-, the ice pad will be sent to him. Complainant transferred an amount of Rs.15,000/- in the account of the OP on 22.05.2023, and thereafter, OP sent the ice pads on 24.05.2023, which were received by him in the first week of June, 2023; i.e after the passing of the peak season of ice candy. Due to non-supply of the ice hardener in time by the OP, the complainant had suffered a loss approximately of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rs. one lac fifty thousand). It is further stated that in the quotation sent by OP, the value of the ice pad hardener was mentioned as Rs.1,15,000/-, but the  OP delivered the hardener without ice pad. When after receiving the ice pad hardener without ice pad, complainant requested the OP to send the ice pad then it demanded an amount of Rs.15,000/-, and under such compelling circumstances, the complainant sent the amount of Rs.15,000/-, to the OP.  The OP had already received the amount of Rs.1,13,000/- from the complainant by it, as per the quotation and as such, complainant took Rs.1,28,000/- from the complainant against the agreed amount of Rs.1,15,000/- in this way it received  Rs.13,000/-, extra than the agreed rate, but the OP sent the bill of Rs. 59,000/- only i.e. Rs. 50,000/- value of hardener and Rs. 9000/- IGST.  In this way, the OP acted dishonestly with the complainant. It is further stated that it was agreed between the OP and the complainant and also mentioned in the quotation that there will be full G.I. body and 22 gauge G.I. sheet tank but in the hardener, OP had used 24 gauge G.I. sheet in the tank. Though the OP has received the payment of 22 gauge G.I. sheet yet it used 24 gauge G.I. sheet in the tank. At the time of purchase of the hardener, OP assured that the ice pad will work for 15 hours but on use complainant came to know that the ice pad had worked for 5 hours only as the material used by it in making the ice pad was of low quality and width of the ice pad is also at lower side and due to this reason, the ice pad is not working properly. The ice pad worked only for 5 hours instead of 15 hours as a result of which the ice candy kept in the hardener got melted after 5 hours resulting into loss to the complainant. Under compelling circumstances, the complainant served a legal notice dated 28.06.2023, upon the OP, but to no avail.  Hence this complaint.
3.           Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the OP before this Commission, therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 19.01.2024.
4.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 and C-9 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in the first instance supplying the product in question after a huge delay and that too of different specifications and low quality to the complainant, as referred to above, the OP is deficient in providing service and guilty of adoption of unfair trade practice.
7.           It is coming out from quotation dated 15.04.2023, Annexure C-3 that the OP was to deliver One Ice Pad Hardener Full G.I. Body and 22 gauge G.I. Sheet tank and with SS (304) door and Top Compressor Tacoms 2495 with 19*22*4 row condenser for Rs.1,15,000/- to the complainant. From Tax Invoice dated 12.05.2023, Annexure C-4, it is coming out the hardener code 8438 was sent to the complainant, against an amount of Rs.59000/-. Ice pad was also sent to the complainant vide bill, Annexure C-7.  It is coming out from the payment receipts, Annexure C-8 and C-9 that total amount of Rs.1,28,000/- stood paid to the OP by the complainant against the said products. However, it is the definite case of the complainant that:-  
   1. In the first instance, the OP promised to supply the hardener alongwith ice pad till 25.04.2023, but hardener was supplied by the OP on 12.05.2023 which was received by the complainant after one week and thereafter ice pad was received by the complainant in the first week of June, 2023, and due to this reason, there is a loss of about Rs.1,50,000/- to the complainant as almost the season has passed away.
   2. In the quotation, the price of the ice pad hardener was mentioned Rs.1,15,000/-, but the  OP received an amount of Rs.1,28,000/-, thus the OP have received Rs.13,000/- in excess from the complainant which needs to be refunded.
   3. The OP received Rs.1,28,000/- from the complainant, but has given the bill of Rs.59,000/- only.
   4. The OP used 24 gauge G.I. sheet in the tank, though have received the payment of 22 gauge G.I. sheet but used 24 gauge G.I. sheet in the tank.
   5. The  ice pad sent by the  OP is of very low quality though the  OP assured that the ice pad will activate/remain in working for 15 hours but when the complainant started using the ice pad then it came to notice that the ice pad remained only in working for 5 hours as the material used by the  OP in making the ice pad was used of low quality and width of the ice pad is also at lower side and due to this reason, the ice pad is not working properly and used to work for only 5 hours instead of 15 hours as a result of which the ice candy for which the ice pad is used, started melting after 5 hours only resulting into loss to the complainant.

 

8.           It is further the case of the complainant that despite making number of requests to the OP in the matter, nothing has been done by it and he has been left in lurch. It is significant to mention here that, as stated above, notice of this complaint was sent to OP seeking its version, yet, nobody appeared on its behalf, despite service,  as a result whereof, it was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 19.01.2024. The non-appearance of the OP shows that it has nothing to say in its defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant went unrebutted & uncontroverted, and as such, we have no reason to disbelieve the contention of the complainant, which is duly supported by documentary evidence. Thus, we do not hesitate to conclude that by providing the wrong product and that too after delay, the complainant has been caused a lot of mental agony and harassment, including financial loss, which act amounts to deficiency in providing service and adoption of unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.
9.           In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OP, in the following manner:- 
   1. To replace the hardener of 22 gauge instead of 24 gauge and also replace the ice pad of working capacity of 15 hours, within a period of 45 days, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, they shall be liable to pay Rs.50/- per day from the date of default, till realization.
   2. To refund the excess amount of Rs.13,000/- received from the complainant and pay Rs.5,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant and Rs.3,000/-, as litigation expenses, within the period of 45 days, from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, failing which the OPs No.1 and 2 shall pay interest @8% per annum on the awarded amount, from the date of default, till realization.

          

                    Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned, as per rules.File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced:- 16.10.2024

 

	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
	Member	President