Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/09/2085

Mayur Kicha. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri. Dhanpa Jain - Opp.Party(s)

30 Oct 2009

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/2085

Mayur Kicha.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sri. Dhanpa Jain
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED: 28-08-2009 DISPOSED ON: 30-10-2009 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 30TH OCTOBER 2009 PRESENT :-SRI. B.S.REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.2085/2009 COMPLAINANT Sri.Mayur Khicha, S/o.Sri.Mansuklal.C.Khicha, # 2, 1st Cross, Manavarthpet, K.V.Temple Street, Bangalore – 560 053. V/s. OPPOSITE PARTY M/s. Hello Fitness, #1029, 42nd Cross, Near Lukush Park, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bangalore – 560 078. By Sri.Dhanpal Jain. O R D E R SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT The complainant filed this complaint u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. on an allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the OP. The case of the complainant to be stated in brief is as under:- 2. The complainant purchased a Soba Massage Belt and a Massage Roller from the OP on 14-06-2009 and same did not work. The OP handed over one more Soba Massage Belt, accordingly the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- to the OP. The complainant was assured by the OP that on usage of the Soba Massage Belt there will be a wonderful result of reduction of tummy and if there is no result entire amount would be refunded. Inspite of using the said Belt as advised by the OP the complainant could not achieve any result. The complainant approached the OP personally and also over phone to refund the amount and take back the Massage Belt and Massage Roller. OP has not responded for the same, then the complainant got issued legal notice dated 22-07-2009 and another notice dated 01-08-2009. OP has received the said notice and not replied the same. Hence the complaint seeking above stated relief. 3. Inspite of service of notice OP has not appeared before this Forum as such OP is placed exparte. 4. The complainant filed affidavit to substantiate the complaint allegations. 5. Heard from the complainant side. Points that arise for our consideration are:- Point No. 1 :- Whether the OP is guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service ? Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the relief’s now claimed? Point No. 3 :- To what Order? 6. We record our findings on :- Point No.1:- Affirmative Point No.2:- Affirmative in part Point No.3:- As per final Order. R E A S O N 7. After perusing the complaint allegations and the affidavit evidence and also documents produced by the complainant it is clear that the complainant has purchased a Soba Massage Belt from the OP for a sum of Rs.4,999/-. On the receipt itself it is mentioned that 45 days money back guarantee if no result is achieved. The complainant is made use of said Massage Belt and Massage Roller but no result was achieved as assured by the OP. Inspite of issue of legal notices dated 22-07-2009 and 01-08-2009 OP has not replied the said notices and not refunded the amount as assured. Under these circumstances we are of the view that OP is guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. The complainant is entitled for the refund of the amount claimed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed. Op is directed to refund an amount of Rs.5,000/- with litigation cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant and take back the Soba Massage Belt and Massage Roller failing which complainant is entitled to claim interest at 12%p.a from the date of complaint till the date of realization. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication. Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of October 2009.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT NRS