Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                                    Complaint No. : 689.

                                                                    Instituted on     : 05.12.2017.

                                                                    Decided on       : 04.04.2019.

Ms. Luxmi, Age 30 years, D/o Sh. Wazir Singh Tomar, R/o #2031/10, Gali No.15, Ram Gopal Colony, Sonepat Road, Rohtak.

                                                                             ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

Shri Balaji Vastralaya, Railway Raod, Rohtak-124001.

……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                    SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.

                   DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.

Present:       Sh. Naseeb Dalal, Advocate for complainant.

                   Opposite party already exparte.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

                             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant had booked a Lehnga Chuni from Shri Balaji Vastralaya/opposite party for her marriage occasion and had paid an amount of Rs.15000/- on dated 07.12.2015 in advance to shopkeeper. That complainant had visited the shop on fixed date i.e.14.12.2015 for receiving the Lehanga Chuni but the respondent had denied to give the same due to non-availability. Then complainant requested him to return the payment but the same was also denied. That due to above said act and conduct of the opposite party the complainant has suffered a great mental tension, harassment, pain and agony. That she had given a legal notice to opposite party on 15.11.2017 through her counsel but opposite party failed to reply. As such it is averred that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Accordingly the complainant has sought the amount of Rs.30000/- alongwith compensation and litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.

2.                          After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the complainant had purchased the said lehnga chunni from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.27,800/-, out of which the complainant has paid only Rs. 15,000/- and an amount of Rs. 12,800/- was remained due towards her and the complainant assured to pay the same upto 14.12.2015 and will receive the lehnga after necessary fittings. It is further submitted that on 14.12.2015, the complainant reached on the shop of respondent and has received the lehnga from respondent and checked the same and was fully satisfied from the quality and thereafter, the complainant assured the complainant to pay the amount within one week. The bill was issued to the complainant and she has no right to seek refund of amount in any manner. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost qua the opposite party.  However, on 08.03.2019, the opposite party failed to appear before the Forum, hence,  opposite party was proceeded  against  exparte vide order dated 03.04.2019 passed by this Forum.

3.                          Complainant in her evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.CW1/A and Ex.CW2/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed her evidence on dated 19.12.2018.

4.                          As per copy of marriage Card Ex.C2, the marriage of the  complainant was to be solemnized on 14.12.2015 and as per receipt Ex.C1, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.15000/- on account of booking of Lehnga Chunni to the opposite party but on 14.12.2015, when she  reached the opposite party for taking the alleged lehnga, the same was refused by the opposite party. Complainant in order to prove her case has tendered her affidavit Ex.PW1/A and affidavit Ex.CW2/A of one Jyoti wherein the contents made in complaint have been re-iterated by both of them on oath.  Copy of legal notice Ex.C3 is also placed on record. It is also submitted in the affidavit that being urgency of her marriage she had to arrange another lehnga and all her dreams dashed to the earth. The perusal of record reveals that the respondent has failed to provide the sought services in time and harassed the complainant and also did not file any evidence in support of his case and was proceeded against exparte. As such it is presumed that opposite party has nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite party regarding not providing the lehnga chunni stands proved and as such the complainant is entitled for suitable compensation in the matter.

5.                          In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that respondent shall refund the amount of Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only) deposited by her with the respondent and shall also pay a sum of Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only) as compensation and Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. Complaint is allowed accordingly.

6.                         Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

04.04.2019

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          …………………………………

                                                          Ved Pal, Member.

                                                                        ………………………………..

                                                                        Renu Chaudhary, Member.