BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 301/2009 Filed on 03.11.2009

Dated : 30.08.2010

Complainant:

Justice J.M. James, Former Judge, High Court of Kerala, residing at 'Grace', VRA-C2, RNP Lane, Vellayambalam, Sasthamangalam, Thiruvananthapuram-10.

(By adv. S. Reghukumar)

Opposite parties :

1. Snow 'N' White, Dry Cleaners, Narayana Towers, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram.

    

2. Mr. David, Proprietor, Snow 'N' White, Dry Cleaners, Narayana Towers, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. Jayamohan. M)

This O.P having been heard on 11.08.2010, the Forum on 30.08.2010 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER

Complainant entrusted his new white branded shirt manufactured by M/s Lee costing Rs. 3,000/- for dry cleaning to the opposite parties in the month of July 2009. On entrustment the opposite parties gave a receipt and was informed that the shirt will be ready after dry cleaning for delivery on the due date. The shirt was taken delivery of in the month of August in a covered packet. The same was received on making required payment and the bill originally issued was surrendered to the opposite parties as demanded. The complainant stored the dry cleaned shirt in his wardrobe in the same packet of delivery and it was taken for wearing in the month of September. It was then noted that while the colour of the shirt had almost faded and had changed into cream colour and there were black patches and black dots on the shirt. Hence the shirt could not be worn and it was taken to the opposite parties on 09.09.2009. The wife of the 2^nd opposite party, on examining the shirt found the complaint of the complainant was true. She explained that though there are different stages to ensure quality of the dry cleaning, due to the large volume of work, lapses occur. She therefore assured the complainant that a re-wash would be done as per a peculiar method and the entire black patches and black dots on the shirt will be cleaned. Believing the words of the opposite parties the complainant again entrusted the shirt to the opposite parties for re-wash on their suggestion. The complainant was given a receipt dated 09.09.2009 and agreed to deliver the same on 15.09.2009. The shirt was actually taken delivery of on 12.10.2009. The endorsement regarding the receipt of the shirt and the details were incorporated in the reverse of another bill. The complainant went to collect the shirt on 15.09.2009 in the opposite party's shop. Before delivery the complainant examined the shirt. Shockingly the shirt not only contained all the black patches and dots it had after the first dry cleaning but also further looked dirtier than when given for re-washing. As the proprietor had reportedly gone to London, in connection with his child's education and his wife not being present in the shop, the complainant did not collect the shirt. The complainant repeatedly went to the opposite party's shop and both the proprietor and his wife were not available. That was why the re-washed shirt was collected on 12.10.2009. When the complainant showed the uncleaned portions and unsatisfactory and unacceptable appearances of the shirt, which made an elite branded shirt unworthy of even wearing, the 2^nd opposite party had all the rebuff to the complainant and stated that the opposite parties are having more than 400 customers per day and therefore they cannot guarantee full clean to every item. Further the 2^nd opposite party was very rude and he was not recognizing the right of a consumer. He wore an attitude of “if you want to take it or go and do what you want to do”. The complainant left with no other option, received the shirt in a packed cover on 12.10.2009 and the same was taken home. As per the complainant the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in the matter. A branded white shirt became defective after even repeated dry cleaning. The shirt cannot be worn in public and same has been rendered useless. The act of the opposite parties by shirking responsibility after the incident constitutes unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.

The opposite parties 'Snow 'N' White Dry Cleaners, accepted notice of this complaint issued from this Forum. But they did not turn up to contest the case, even though this Forum allowed sufficient time for them to file version, but they did not file version. Hence the opposite parties are set exparte.

The complainant has filed chief affidavit and produced the receipt from the opposite party which is marked as Ext. P1. The shirt in dispute was produced here and marked as MO1.

The points which arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether there has been deficiency in service or unfair trade practice occurred from the side of opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs sought for and costs?

    

Points (i) & (ii):- The complainant in this case is a retired High Court Judge. He entrusted his new branded shirt costing Rs. 3,000/- for dry cleaning to the opposite parties. The complainant alleged that due to the substandard workmanship of the opposite parties his branded shirt became defective and the shirt cannot be worn in public and the same has been rendered useless. The said instances have led to substantial monetary loss and mental agony and hence the opposite parties are bound to compensate him. To prove his contention he has filed proof affidavit and produced the bill issued by the opposite parties as Ext. P1 and the damaged shirt produced as MO1. We have thoroughly examined the defects of the shirt and found the allegations raised by the complainant are true. The shirt cannot be used in public and the same became useless. The complainant has not produced any evidence regarding the price of the shirt. The complainant has stated in the complaint and affidavit that the price of the shirt is Rs. 3,000/-. The affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged, hence we accept that contention. Opposite parties were given sufficient time for contesting the case, but they did not turn up. Moreover in this case the complainant very sadly stated that the attitude of the opposite parties towards him was worst. From the pleadings and evidences adduced by the complainant we find that there has been deficiency in service and unfair trade practice occurred from the side of opposite parties. Due to the act of the opposite parties the complainant has sustained monetary loss and mental agony. Hence the complaint is allowed.

In the result, the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant as the price of the shirt and the opposite parties shall pay Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the complainant. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter 9% annual interest shall be paid to the entire amount. The opposite parties are directed to collect the shirt from the Forum after the compliance of the order.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of August 2010.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 301/2009

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Damaged Shirt

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT

jb