Date of Filing:16/10/2015

  Date of Order: 28/10/2016

ORDER

BY SRI.H.JANARDHAN, MEMBER

1.     This is the complaint filed U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred in short as O.Ps) alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and prays for direction to the O.Ps to deliver the Maharaja Diwan set or in the alternative refund a sum of Rs.10,000/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 11.04.2015 till the date of repayment.  Further O.Ps be directed to deliver back the old furniture in the same condition or in the alternative to pay a sum of Rs.7,000/- along with interest at 18% per annum from 11.04.2014 till the date of repayment. Also pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and cost of the proceedings.

2.   The brief facts of the complaint is that, on 11.4.2015 the complainant visited the O.p shop and enquired about furniture to be installed in the house of the complainant. After going through the furniture displayed and the  complainant selected an elephant sofa set which consisted of three seater sofa, one two seater sofa and one maharaja dewan sofa set.  As the complainant did not have enough space for new furniture in his house and as such the complainant intended to dispose of his old furniture before a new sofa set could be purchased.  O.P.No.2 voluntarily took custody of the complainant’s old furniture and gave assurance to sell them of within a period of one month and therefore urged the complainant to purchase the new elephant sofa and the total prize of the elephant sofa set was quoted  for Rs.29,500/-. The complainant wished to have a maharaja Dewan sofa set which had a back rest.  However the same was not readily available in the show room of the O.p and hence O.p sought one week time to supply the same to the complainant.   Further in this regard O.P had issued an estimation dated 11.4.2015 bearing reference NO.370  for the entire elephant sofa set and  clearly mentioned by the 2^nd O.P that the maharaja dewan is yet to be delivered by the remark balance.  Further the estimation bill shows  that an entire amount of Rs.29,500/- has been received by the O.Ps.   As the 2^nd O.p has already offered to sell complainants old furniture and on the same day that the  O.P has  received the old furniture in to his custody. When the elephant sofa set excluding a maharaja dewan set which was delivered to the complainant’s house.  The complainant old furniture consists of three seater sofa set and two single seater cushioned chair  with arms.  But till this date the O.P has not intimated about the status of old furniture. But the O.P. did not deliver the maharaja dewan set as the O.p promised to deliver the same within a period of one week from 11.4.2014. Hence the complainant visited the showroom of O.P four times but the O.ps would always give one or other excuse for not having delivered the maharaja dewan set.  Further the complainant followed this matter over the phone with both the O.ps.  However the O.ps gave lame excuse over the phone also and on repeated phone calls from the complainant that the 1^st O.P undertook to deliver the maharaja dewan set on 12.5.2015.  The complainant was frustrated by the delay tactics of the O.Ps in delivering the maharaja Dewan sofa set as the complainant made the entire payment of Rs.29,500/- on 11.4.2015 itself. In fact,  the complainant had given his old furniture for resale and sale proceeds if any needs  with the accounted by the O.Ps having been frustrated by the deliberate in action on the part of the Ops. Hence the complainant got issued a legal notice on 23.5.2015 calling upon the O.Ps to either deliver the maharaja dewan set or refund an amount of Rs.10,000/- and further complainant sought for account of sale of his old furniture that was handed over to O.Ps and sought for receipt of the sale proceeds. Or in the alternative sought for handing over of the old furniture with the same condition as it was handed over  to the O.Ps.  Further the O.P. neither replied to the notice nor complied the same. Hence complainant alleged that conduct of the O.Ps in non-delivering maharaja dewan set and by not handing over the sale proceeds of his old furniture which leads to deficiency in service and hence being aggrieved by the above said act of the O.Ps and the complainant filed this complaint.

3.     Upon issuance of notice to O.Ps but O.P.No.1 and 2 remained absent. Consequently the O.P.No.1 and 2 were placed exparte.

4.     To substantiate the above case, the complainant has filed his  affidavit evidence along with documents.  We have heard the arguments.

5.     On the basis of pleadings of the complainant, the following points will arise for our considerations are:-

                                   (A Whether the complainant has proved

                      deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

(B)    Whether the complainant is entitled to        

       the relief prayed for in the complaint?

(C)    What order?

6.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT (A) & (B):  In the Affirmative.

POINT (C):  As per the final order

   for the following:

REASONS

POINT  No (A) & (B):-

7.     On perusing the documents available on record, it reveals that the complainant had booked one Elephant sofa sets which consists of one, three seater sofa,  one, two seater sofa and one, maharaja dewan sofa set and the total price of elephant sofa set was quoted for Rs.29,500/-. Further complainant paid Rs.29,500/- towards the purchase of the above said sofa sets. It is the grievence of the complainant is that subsequent to payment O.Ps able to send sofa sets only and not the dewan maharaja set. Further complainant states that in view of non-availability of the space in his house he is handed over his old furniture  to the O.P. in order to send the same and the O.P also received the old furniture but sale proceeds of the old furniture was not given to the complainant and also not inform the status of the old furniture and also not deliver the maharaja sofa set.   However, O.P sought one week time to supply the same to the complainant.  On perusing the invoice dated 11.4.2015 bearing reference No.370 for the entire elephant sofa set and it is clearly mentioned by the 2^nd O.p. that the maharaja dewan set is yet to be delivery by the remark balance.  Further the 2^nd O.P offered the complainant to sell the old furniture  believing the words of the O.P to the complainant had given his old furniture consisting of one three seater sofa set and two single seater cushioned chair with arms to O.P No.2 showroom for resale.  The said old furniture has been received by both O.ps on the date of delivery of the three seater and two seater sofa set was purchased by the complainant from O.Ps show room.  But till this date O.Ps have not given the status  of the old furniture.  Furthermore, the delivery of the maharaja dewan set was not made to the complainant within a period of one week from 11.4.2015 as undertaken by the O.ps.

8.     On the basis of the evidence placed before us, the complainant established that, inspite of his due payment O.P is not deliver the Dewan Maharaja set and also not intimated the status of his old furniture or not paid the sale proceeds of the old furniture.  Inspite of the service of notice the O.ps remained absent for the reasons best known to them and  all the allegations made in the complaint remaind unchallenged.  Also on perusal of the both oral and documentary evidence there is no occasion to disbelieve the allegations of the complainant.  Hence we are of the considered opinion that, by non-delivering the maharaja sofa set as undertaken by the O.P and not giving sale procees of the old furniture or return back the old furniture issued from the complainant it also amounts to deficiency in service and hence the complainant is entitled for the dewan maharaja set also entitle for the old furniture. This clearly depicts deficiency in service on the part of O.ps for which the complainant entitled for the relief.  O.Ps are directed to deliver the maharaja dewan set which is pending for delivery if they are not able to  deliver the maharaja dewan set within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order O.ps are directed to pay an amount of Rs.7,000/- and further O.ps are directed to pay an amount of Rs.4,000/- for the approximate value of the used furniture taken by the O.P from the house of the complainant.  Further O.ps are directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings.  If the O.ps failed to comply the orders of this Forum within 30 days than the O.Ps are liable to pay an interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till realization, it will meets the ends of justice. In the light of above discussion we accordingly answered the Point No.(A) & (B) in the affirmative.

POINT No.(C)

9.     On the basis of the findings given above on the point No.(A) and (B) and in the result, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. The complaint is allowed-in-part with cost.

2. The OP.No.1 and 2 are hereby directed to deliver the maharaja dewan set which is pending for delivery, failing to deliver the maharaja dewan set within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order or else to pay an amount of Rs.7,000/- to the complainant. Further O.ps are directed to pay an amount of Rs.4,000/- for the value of the used furniture to the complainant.

3. Further O.Ps are hereby directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to the cost of the proceedings.
4. The O.P is hereby directed to comply the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which O.Ps are directed to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the award amount after the expiry of 30 days till realization and directed to submit the compliance report to this Forum within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.

5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 28^th Day of October 2016)

MEMBER                        PRESIDENT