DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD<br /> <br /> Dated this the 20th day of April 2007.<br /> <br /> Present : Prof.O.Unnikrishnan, Senior Member<br /> Smt.K.P.Suma, Member<br /> C.C.No.94/2006<br /> <br /> P.P.Jayarajan,<br /> Pookot melethil House,<br /> Anakkara,<br /> Ottapalam, Palakkad. - Complainant<br /> <br /> V/s<br /> <br /> Smt.Radha,<br /> Manager,<br /> Krishna Home Nursing Services,<br /> Guruvayur Road, Koottanad,<br /> Koottanad Post, Ottapalam. - Opposite party <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> By Prof.O.Unnikrishnan, Senior Member<br /> The case of the complainant in brief is as follows:<br /> The complainant is residing at Anakara Amsam in Ottapalam Taluk and the opposite party office is functioning near to his residence. He approached the opposite party office on 04/2/2006 for the purpose of availing the service of a home nurse in order to take care of his aged mother. The opposite party made him believe that their institution is a reliable one rendering very good services to the public and there upon he hired the service of one home nurse from them on payment of Rs.600/- as registration charge and Rs.2000/- towards one month advance salary. Accordingly one home nurse was sent to complainant's residence on 04/2/2006 itself. It is alleged in the complaint that the opposite party recalled the nurse on 06/2/2006 promising the complainant that another nurse would be sent to him without any delay. After waiting for 2 days, the complainant went to opposite party office and enquired about the home nurse. But it was informed by<br /> - 2- <br /> the opposite party that there was no home nurse available with them and therefore they could not send the nurse. Moreover they suggested him to choose alternate arrangement to get the service of home nurse. Hence the complainant approached Edappal Home Nursing Institution on 08/2/2006 itself and availed the service of home nurse by paying an amount of Rs.2800/- It is submitted in the complaint that his mother expired on 17/2/2006 . The complainant states that he requested opposite party to repay the amount paid by him and all the expenses incurred. When it was denied the complainant caused to send a lawyer notice on 1.3.2006 demanding the amount paid and expenses. Instead of repaying the amount the opposite party in his reply notice stated false allegations. The complainant further submits that the opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.2600/- as per the Ext.A1, to pay a sum of Rs.700/- by way of transporting and other expenses for availing another nurse, to pay an amount of Rs.5000/- by way of compensation towards mental agony suffered by the complainant and to pay Rs.500/- as notice expenses.<br /> Feeling aggrieved the complainant filed this complaint before the Forum seeking an order directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.8800/- along with the cost of the complaint.<br /> After admitting the complaint, notice was served to opposite party for her appearance before the Forum. Opposite party appeared and filed the written statement. Opposite party in her version admitted the fact that a home nurse named Sreedevi was sent to the house of the complainant and entrusted the complainant on 04/2/2006. It is stated in the version that she received a sum of Rs.2600/- from the complainant as booking charge. The opposite party office is situated at a distance of 25 km from the residence of the complainant. Opposite party denied the allegation of the complainant that he recalled the home nurse on 06/2/2006 and promised to send another nurse without any delay. It is further stated in the version that the opposite party did not suggest the complainant to choose alternate arrangement to avail the service of home nurse on 08/2/2006 as there was no home nurse available with them. According to the opposite party, after the death of the mother of the complainant, he sent away the home nurse instead of entrusting the said nurse at the opposite party office. The opposite party was unaware of the fact that the complainant had availed the service of another home nurse from Edappal Nursing Service for which they were not responsible . It is averred in the version that there was no deficiency in service on their part and therefore he has not suffered any loss or damage due to the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite party to the complainant. Opposite party was not responsible for arranging another home nurse from Edappal and therefore he was not liable to pay the amount to the complainant towards transportation and other expenses. Opposite party believes that the complainant has filed this complaint with a malafide intention to defame them. It is submitted that the case may be dismissed with cost and compensatory cost to the opposite party.<br /> Both the parties filed affidavits as well as documents. Ext.A1 to A5 were marked on the side of the complainant. The complainant filed answers to the questionnaire filed by the opposite party. The evidence was closed. Heard the arguments of the counsels appeared for the parties.<br /> It is admitted fact that the opposite party has arranged the service of a home nurse to the complainant's residence on 04/2/2006 for looking after his aged mother and received an amount of Rs.2600/- from the complainant as per the Ext.A1. The contention of the complainant is that the opposite party recalled the said home nurse on 06/2/2006 without making any substitute arrangement. So the complainant hired the service of another home nurse from Edappal home nursing service on 08/2/2006 by paying an amount of Rs.2800/- as per the Ext.A2. The complainant suffered financial loss and mental agony due to the irresponsible act of the opposite party. But the opposite party argued that he did not recall the home nurse on 06/2/2006 but the same home nurse was sent back by the complainant himself after the death of his mother without entrusting the nurse with the opposite party. But nothing has prevented the opposite party from filing the affidavit of the home nurse stating that she was rendering service at complainant's residence from 06/2/2006 till the death of complainant's mother. So we find that opposite party has failed to produce any contra evidence to disprove the contention of the complainant that the home nurse was recalled on 06/2/2006. So there is no doubt that the complainant had arranged another home nurse from Edappal home nurse services to take care of his mother. We are of the view that the opposite party has adopted deceptive practice by recalling the home nurse from the complainant's residence and not making any<br /> <br /> - 4 -<br /> substitute arrangement for taking care of complainant's aged mother after receiving a sum of Rs.2600/- from him. So we attribute deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. In the result the complaint is allowed.<br /> The opposite party is directed to repay the complainant a sum of Rs.2600/- (Rupees Two thousand six hundred only) and pay an amount of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as compensation towards financial loss and mental agony along with a sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) as costs within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to get the whole amount along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of order till realisation.<br /> <br /> Pronounced in the open court on this the 20th day of April 2007.<br /> <br /> President in charge (SD)<br /> <br /> Member (SD)<br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant<br /> <br /> Ext.A1 – Payment receipt issued by opposite party dt.4/2/06 for Rs.2600/-<br /> Ext.A2 – Payment receipt issued by Edappal Home Nursing for Rs.800/-<br /> Ext.A3 – Payment receipt issued by Edappal Home Nursing for Rs.2000/-<br /> Ext.A4 series – Copy of Lawyer notice with postal receipt and acknowledgment.<br /> Ext.A5 – Reply notice <br /> <br /> Cost – Rs.500/- allowed as costs.<br /> <br /> Forwarded/by Order,<br /> Sd/-<br /> Senior Superintendent <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />