DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

BATHINDA

CC No.77 of 15-4-2021

Decided on : 10-7-2023

Sukhpreet Singh, #E-57, Opposite Park, Industrial Area, Near ITI Chowk, Bathinda.

1. .......Complainant

   1.  

Versus

Saraf Furniture, RIICO Industrial Area, Kalyanpura Road, Sardarsahar- 331403, Rajasthan, India, through its Sales Manager.

.......Opposite party

Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

QUORUM:-

Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member

Present :-

For the complainant : Sh. Inderjeet Singh, Advocate.

For opposite party : Ex-parte.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

1. The complainant Mr. Sukhpreet Singh (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Saraf Furniture, (here-in-after referred to as opposite party).

2. Briefly, the facts of the complaint as pleaded by the complainant are that on 18.10.2020, he ordered a dining table (Solid Wood Romeo Dining Set) on online portal of the opposite party and on 13.11.2020, the ordered product was delivered with Order Number- INSF322712133 and Invoice Number SFN7172133-22347 respectively. The complainant, purchased the ordered Product for a total amount for Rs.40,040/-. The complainant has ordered the product of Solid Sheesham Wood but he received the complete faulty product with hollow parts constituted in it and some light material filled in it. The product delivered was totally different from the shown product on the Online Shopping Portal. That complainant alleged that in December, 2020, he noticed that the top of the dining table has been bent and the mid support of the table has been detached. Even the dining table and chairs were not uniformly polished. The colour of a particular part varies vividly from the other part. Despite several attempts of the complainant to apprise the opposite party about the faced issue, not even a single constructive response has been received from the opposite party.

3. It is alleged that complainant received totally defective product in contrast to what was shown on the Online Shopping Portal. The complainant till now did not receive the refund amount despite repeated requests to the opposite party.

4. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to opposite party to replace the product or refund the amount of Rs.40,040/- and pay Rs.5000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and mental harassment and agony.

5. Registered A.D. Notice of complaint was sent to the opposite party, but, none appeared on their behalf, as such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against them.

6. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 7.4.2022 (Ex.C-12) and documents (Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-11).

7. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant had purchased one dining table with chairs vide Invoice Ex. C-2. However, the said product, purchased by complainant was found to be defective and the complainant lodged complaints with the opposite party vide e-mails Ex. C-3 to Ex. C-5 and was duly replied by the opposite party vide e-mail Ex. C-6, Ex. C-8 & Ex. C-9 but the opposite party neither replaced the defective product nor refunded its price. The complainant got served legal notice upon the opposite party in this regard, even then, the opposite party failed to refund the amount of Rs. 40,040/- to the complainant.

8. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record.

9. To prove his case, complainant has placed on file his duly sworn affidavit, copy of invoice, copy of e-mails with photographs of defective dining table and chairs and has proved on record that product supplied by the opposite party was defective. The evidence adduced by the complainant has remained unrebutted. Therefore, failure on the part of the opposite party to replace the defective product or refund of its price, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

10. Accordingly, this complaint is partly allowed and opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 40,040/- to complainant alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. The complainant is directed to return the defective dinining table alongwith chairs to the opposite party after receiving the aforesaid amount.

11. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

12. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

13. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

    Announced :

    10-07-2023

    (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

    President

     

     

    (Shivdev Singh)

    Member