Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

13/2009

K.M.Veeraraghavan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Skanda Management System , Manager - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

12 Jun 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 22.12.2008

                                                                          Date of Order : 12.06.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.13 /2009

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 12^th DAY OF JUNE 2018

                                 

Mr. K. M. Veeraraghavan,

S/o. Mr. K. M. Ramanujam,

No.16/58, Solaiappan Street,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                                     .. Complainant.                                                           ..Versus..

 

SKANDA MANAGEMENT SYTEMMZ. (Regd.),

Represented by its Manager,

No.171/7, 6^th Street,

Kumaran Colony,

Vadapalani,

Chennai – 600 026.                                                ..  Opposite party.

          

For complainant                        :  Party in person

Counsel for opposite party       :  M/s. P. Vinodh Kumar & another

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to refund a sum of Rs.4,600/- with interest and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that he contacted the opposite party’s agency for providing a patient attender to attend his father in law who was 72 years old and bedridden.   At the request of the opposite party, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4600/- (Rs.4,000/- towards Service Charges, Rs.350/- towards Registration Charges and a sum of Rs.250/- towards travelling expenses).  Further the complainant submits that the opposite party introduced one Mr. Shivaji to attend his father in law at around 2 ’O clock on 22.07.2008 in the morning and the attendant said that he would attend on the patient till late night as he had come only 2 O’ clock and left the hospital at 8’O clock.  The attender said that he would turn up at 10.30 a.m. and had not turned up.   Thereafter the opposite party sent one women named Lily Padma after one week.   She also has not complied with the work as assured by the opposite party.  Thereby, the complainant and his father in law who is a sick patient sustained great mental agony and resulting that the complainant’s father in law breathed his last on 07.09.2008.   The complainant sent legal notice dated:01.11.2008 through RPAD requested to refund the fees.  The letter was not received at the other end and was returned by the Postal Authorities with the reason that ‘ID’.  Hence this complaint is filed.

2.     The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite party states that, he is a popular Manpower Agency in Chennai, helping the person who are economically down.  The opposite party arranged jobs like housekeeping, patient attenders, drivers etc.  The opposite party is selecting such persons after verifying their characters, residential address, photo and finger prints. All the customers are satisfied with the service of the opposite party. In this case, the allegation that the opposite party received a sum of Rs.250/- towards travelling expenses and Rs.50/- towards food are all false.   Further the opposite party states that the attenders sent by the opposite party has not been permitted to do their work in the proper manner.   On the other hand, the complainant ill-treated the attenders in a rude manner and never allowed the attender to have the food in time.  The complainant treated the attender like a slave.   The opposite party states that the attender was attending the patient till his death and the complainant made false allegations against the opposite party with an intent to get back the money paid by him.    Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.   In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.   In spite of sufficient time is given, the opposite party has not come forward to file their proof affidavit in order to prove the contentions made in the written version.    Therefore, evidence on the side of the opposite party is closed.

4.     The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,600/- paid towards Service Charges, Registration Fees, and conveyance charges for arranging a house keeper to the opposite party as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

5.     On point:-

The opposite party after filing written version has not turned up to file proof affidavit and documents to prove the contentions raised in the written version.  The complainant also has not preferred to file any written arguments or to advance any oral arguments.   Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavit of the complainant, documents etc. The complainant pleaded in the complaint that he contacted the opposite party’s agency for providing a patient attender to attend his father in law who was 72 years old and  bedridden.  At the request of the opposite party, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4600/- (Rs.4,000/- towards Service Charges, Rs.350/- towards Registration Charges and a sum of Rs.250/- towards travelling expenses).  Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 are the receipts showing the payment.   The complainant has not produced any document to prove the alleged payment towards travelling expenses.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party sent one Mr. Sivaji to attend his father in law at about 2’O clock in the morning and left in the evening and has not turned up proves the deficiency in service.  Thereafter, the opposite party sent one women named Lily Padma after one week.   She also has not complied the work as assured by the opposite party proves the unfair trade practice.  Thereby, the complainant and his father in law who is a sick patient sustained great mental agony resulting that the complainant’s father in law breathed his last on 07.09.2008 proves the deficiency in service.  

6.     The opposite party after filing the written version has not come forward to file any proof affidavit and documents to prove the contentions raised in the written version.  The contention of the opposite party in the written version is that, the opposite party is a popular Manpower Agency in Chennai helping the person who are economically down.  The opposite party arranged jobs like housekeeping, patient attenders, drivers etc.  In this case, the allegation that the opposite party received a sum of Rs.250/- towards travelling expenses and Rs.50/- towards food are totally denied.   But it is not denied that the opposite party received a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards Service Charges and Rs.350/- towards Registration Expenses from the complainant in order to supply House keeper.  Further the opposite party raised the contention that the attenders sent by the opposite party has not been permitted to do their work in the proper manner.   On the other hand, the complainant ill-treated the attenders in a rude manner thereby, the assured service of the opposite party has not been materialised.  But on a careful perusal of records, it is seen that the opposite party has not produced any document to prove such contentions.   Muchless, the opposite party has not preferred to file any proof affidavit; establishes the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall return a sum of Rs.4,350/-  with a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party  is directed to refund a sum of Rs.4,350/- (Rupees four thousand three hundred and fifty only) and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 12^th day of June 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

		Copy of receipts issued by the opposite party
		Copy of the terms and conditions of the opposite party
		Copy of ration card of the patient’s attender who had come only on 22.07.2008
		Copy of photo identityof the patient attendant given by the agency
		Copy of notice served on the opposite party by the complainant
		Copy of notice by the complainant to the opposite party

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  EVIDENCE CLOSED

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT