DATE OF DISPOSAL: 03.12.2024
PER: SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT (I/C)
The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed this Consumer complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties (in short O.Ps.) for redressal of his grievance before this Commission.
2. The complainant is need for a video and photo shoot for his cousin sister’s marriage because all the arrangement is done by the complainant. So he contact the O.P. for video & photo shoot for capture the emotion for this occasion of 27.02.2024 (Mangana, Haldi) & 28.02.2024 manage all moment. On 17.02.2024 the complainant and the O.P. verbally made an agreement in the exchange of Rs.35,000/- the O.P. promise to do photo and videography with two professional film/video maker of Bhubaneswar, 4K resolution, Gamble shoot with done footage and a mix paper with box photo album. The complainant need it very urgent in 15 days but the O.P. not agreed. The complainant paid 50% advance payment then he will deliver it on 20th March 2024. The complainant paid Rs.15,000/- on 17.02.2024. Again on 27.02.2024 the complainant paid Rs.10,000/- through UPI. On 27.02.2024 the O.P. came with a un-experienced boy with heavy drinking and not able to do video shoot. The O.P. is full of alcohol drink and creates drama then agreed to shoot photos and videos after so many requests. On 28.02.2024 again O.P. not respond complainant call in that time groom is arrived so he is not able to take bridal look video. The O.P. sent 2 boy cameraman is adjustable but the video operation is lack of knowledge about camera he is not able to shoot no gamble no professional nothing. On 16.03.2024 the complainant asked for edited video and photo but all in vain. One day 02.04.2024 when the complainant faces him front to front and collect raw footage (got half of the footage) and remaining footage are lost (40-50%). On 15.04.2024 when the complainant requested to return money to deduct his expenses and he remained silent. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to refund of Rs.35,000/-, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.25,000/- in the best interest of justice.
3. The Commission admitted the case and issued notice to the Opposite Party.
4. The Opposite Party duly acknowledged the notice but refused to receive it. Therefore it is sufficient. Accordingly the complainant adduced evidence on affidavit and filed written argument.
5. On the date of hearing the complainant in person was present and submitted his grievances. The Commission heard and considering the sole testimony of the complainant allowed the complaint as the O.P. rendered deficient services to the complainant which is coming under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
In view of the factual aspects of the case, the Opposite Party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.25,000/- and compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant within 45 days from receipt of this order failing which all the dues shall carry 9% interest per annum till its actual date of realization from the date of filing of this case i.e. 30.04.2024 and the complainant is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for realization of all dues. This case is disposed of accordingly.
The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.
A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.
Pronounced on 03 December 2024.
