O R D E R<br /> <br /> SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K. MEMBER<br /> <br /> The brief of the complaint are that the complainant had given some clothes for dry cleaning to OP No:1 After thorough checking, OP 1 accepted to clean them and issued a receipt to the complainant giving the delivery date as 13/01/2009. On the date of delivery and onwards complainant approached OP to collect the clothes, but OP never delivered and is giving one or the other frivolous reasons and informed that the clothes were not yet ready. After several visits of complainant, OP 1 told that the clothes were burnt and he was shocked and surprised to see that the suit was completely burnt and damaged and other clothes were uncleaned and partly damaged when they were offered. Complainant protested the situation and refused to accept the clothes. Manager of the OP 1 offered to pay Rs.3000/- for the damages suffered but he had not accepted it, because the clothes were very expensive. Thereafter, complainant called the manager of OP 1 several times to seek solution. OP 1 behaved very rudely and not shown customers friendly behavior. Complainant issued legal notices dated 02/06/2009 calling upon the OP’s to pay a sum of Rs.34,500/- towards cost of clothes and Rs.5,00,000/- to a charity of the Forums. OP 1 didn’t come forward to settle the matter. It clearly indicates their negligence in service, approached this Forum to seek relief by directing the OP’s to pay Rs.34,550/- @ 24%, Rs.5,00,000/- to a charity to the Forums deems appropriate as the OP has disregard to law and to award cost.<br /> <br /> Notice sent to OP 1 only, OP 1 has contested the complaint represented by its counsel. Op No:1 filed his objections and affidavit evidence.<br /> <br /> In the objection, OP 1 admitted that complainant had given 15 items for washing and ironing. Out of 15, OP 1 had received 3 sets of ladies salwar suits. Also admitted that before accepting for washing clothes were thoroughly checked and issued receipt bearing No:564 dated 10/01/2009 to the complainant which contained description of garments and date of delivery.<br /> <br /> OP 1 denied that delay in handing over the items was not because of clothes were not ready to deliver but it was due to shut down of one of machines in the factory for want of maintenance, OP 1 submitted that when complainant visited three times, 14 pieces of garments were ready for delivery, accidental burns on only one piece that is kurtha of salwar. OP 1 denied the allegation of complainant that kurtha was completely burnt and remaining clothes were uncleaned and partly burnt or damaged OP 1 also admitted that his manager offered Rs.3000/- to compensate one kurtha which was burnt and denied that complainant left all clothes with them . OP 1 has submitted that complainant took remaining 14 clothes and refused to accept the offer made also submitted that complainant collected the good clothes without paying the washing charges. For the reason, the complaint is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> In the course of enquiry into the complaint, complainant, complainant has filed his affidavit evidence reiterating what he has stated in the complaint. The complainant has filed copy of legal notices sent to OP’s along with the complaint. We have heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records.<br /> <br /> On the above materials, following points for determination arise. <br /> <br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves that the OP 1 has caused deficiency in his service in not, returning the clothes which were given for dry cleaning? <br /> 2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?<br /> <br /> <br /> Our findings are as under:<br /> <br /> Answer on point No:1 In the affirmative<br /> Answer on Point No:2 To see the final order.<br /> <br /> REASONS:<br /> <br /> Answer point No:1 On 10/01/2009 complainant had given 15 clothes for dry cleaning to OP 1 which were supposed to be return back on 13/01/2009. But OP 1 not returned them for the reason that clothes were not in good condition to deliver back though he was accepted after thoroughly checked before taking for cleaning. For that OP 1 issued a receipt mentioned with delivery date as 13/01/2009. After several visits and requests of complainant, OP failed to deliver the said clothes. Even after issuing legal notice from complainant, OP 1 neither responded nor compensate for the damaged items.<br /> <br /> OP 1 admitted that 15 pieces of garments were taken for cleaning and stated except one ladies kurtha of salwar other 14 pieces were kept ready for delivery after cleaning and ironing and admitted that there was delay in delivering because the machinery was under repair. When complainant visited to OP 1 third time, OP conveyed that one salwar has burnt and for that OP offered Rs.3000/- to compensate the loss.<br /> <br /> According to complainant, he has protested the act of OP 1 and refused to receive all given items. But OP 1 has contended that complainant took delivery of 14 garments which were in good condition and refused to collect the compensation without paying the cleaning charges. Complainant denied the same and OP 1 has not produced any document signature of complainant over the receipt regarding delivery of 14 garments to prove that they been delivered to the complainant.<br /> <br /> Complainant admitted in the Complaint that OP 1 offered Rs.3000/- towards the compensation. Since the given clothes were very expensive, the offer was not satisfactory therefore, was refused. Complainant submitted that all given clothes were left with OP, the question of non-payment of cleaning charges doesn’t arise, since they were uncleaned and partially damaged.<br /> <br /> At the time of arguments, complainant has not produced any material document regarding the cost of clothes and date of purchase of the said clothes. Counsel for complainant was unable to pronounce the same orally despite the Forum, raised the question. It indicates that complainant failed to prove the actual cost of those clothes. For the reason, the depreciation of the clothes must be considered.<br /> Considering all these facts, generally, people will give clothes for dry cleaning to maintain the texture for a long time which are expensive one. With this we are of the view that complainant has proved his grievance against OP and OP caused deficiency in service as such. We pass the following order.<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> Complaint is allowed.<br /> <br /> OP 1 is directed to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant towards the cost of clothes within 30 days from the date of this order. <br /> <br /> Failing which he shall pay interest @ 8% p.a. on that amount from the date of this order till the date of payment.<br /> <br /> OP 1 shall also pay cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant.<br />