Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The  complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that he purchased one pair of shoes i.e. Article No.ACK-NA-48191010 from Opposite Party No.1 vide invoice No.55028/00061 dated 28.04.2018 for Rs.3,999/- and at that time, Opposite Party No.1 assured that shoes are manufactured by Opposite Party No.2 for running and assured that the same will not break during running and also assure that if any problem occurs, Opposite Party No.1 will change the same. Further alleges that when the complainant started running by wearing the said shoes during warranty period, it got broken due to which the complainant could not run by wearing these shoes as sole of the shoes have got cracked and now one piece of it has been detached from its remaining part. The complainant visited the shop of Opposite Party No.1 and requested to change the shoes, but they did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and in this way, the complainant suffered mentally and physically in the hands of the Opposite Parties and there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       To direct the Opposite Parties to refund the amount of Rs.3,999/- of the shoes in question.

b)      The amount of Rs.50,000/- be allowed to be paid by the opposite parties on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment caused by the complainant.

c)       The cost of complaint amounting to Rs.21,000/- may please be allowed.

Hence this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, initially, Sh.Sanjeev Kumar representative appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.1 and similarly, Sh.Gurpreet Singh, Advocate appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2, but lateron, none has come present on behalf of both the Opposite Parties nor filed the written version to defend its case despite granting sufficient opportunities as well as subject to payment of costs and as such, Opposite Parties were  proceeded against exparte.   

3.       In order to prove his case, complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copy of bill Ex.C2, copy of legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipts Ex.C4 and Ex.C5 and closed his evidence.

4.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the Complainant and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant purchased one pair of shoes i.e. Article No.ACK-NA-48191010 from Opposite Party No.1 vide invoice No.55028/00061 dated 28.04.2018 for Rs.3,999/- (Ex.C2). The case of the complainant is that at the time of purchase of the shoes in question, Opposite Party No.1 assured that shoes are manufactured by Opposite Party No.2 for running and assured that the same will not break during running and also assure that if any problem occurs, Opposite Party No.1 will change the same. Further contended that when the complainant started running by wearing the said shoes during warranty period, it got broken due to which the complainant could not run by wearing these shoes as sole of the shoes have got cracked and now one piece of it has been detached from its remaining part. The complainant visited the shop of Opposite Party No.1 and requested to change the shoes, but they did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and in this way, the complainant suffered mentally and physically in the hands of the Opposite Parties and there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Party in not returning the shoes in question to the complainant without any reason is an act of deficiency in services, mal practices, Unfair Trade Practice and has caused lot of mental agony, harassment, inconvenience. To corroborate his aforesaid assertion, the Complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copy of bill Ex.C2, copy of legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipts Ex.C4 and Ex.C5.  The aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted and unchallenged through any cogent and convincing evidence on record as  the Opposite Parties,  despite due service, did not opt to defend its case and to contest the proceedings.  In this way, the Opposite Parties have  impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint.

6.       So, from the entire unrebutted and unchallenged  evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that  the Opposite Parties have adopted unfair trade practice despite receipt of its consideration  of consignment  of Rs.3,999/-  as per bill Ex.C2. Further as argued above by the  complainant that he  has been harassed  badly and felt humiliation without any reasonable cause. On this count, the Complainant prayed for refund of the price of the shoes in question as well as to  pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing him mental tension and harassment, but the claim for compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/-  is concerned, the same appears to be exorbitant and excessive. The rationale behind grant of compensation has been to compensate a party of the loss occasioned by it. It is none of the intention of the legislature while legislating the Consumer Protection Act to enrich a particular party at the cost of the other. The compensation has to be awarded in commensuration with the loss occasioned to the complainant. In our considered view, ends of justice would  be fully met if the complainant is awarded lump-sum compensation to the tune of  Rs.2000/- and we award the same accordingly.

7.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the complaint of the complainant against the Opposite Parties jointly or severally and the Opposite Parties are  directed to refund the amount of Rs.3,999/- (Rupees three thousands nine hundred and ninety nine only) alongwith interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 26.07.2019 till its actual realization.  The Opposite Parties are also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousands only) as lumpsum compensation to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties jointly or severally within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to  get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission.   Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.  

8.       Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the government has not  appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this District Consumer Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated: 21.12.2021.