District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.480/2020.
Date of Institution: 11.12.2020.
Date of Order: 03.08.2022.
Shri Gaurav Mangla, S/o Late Shri Yash Pal Mangla R/o A2 -903, Summer Palms, sector-86, Faridabad Haryana – 121002. Mob -88268-43335/81302-21014.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Subh Furniture Works through its Owner, Shop No. 141-142, Owner/Manager, Shri Kaushal Nr. Babbar Electrical , Gopi Colony Chowk, Old Faridabad – 121002.
2. Shri Kaushal Narang (Owner/Manager – Subh Furniture Works), Shop NO. 141-142, Nr. Babbar Electrical, Gop8i Colony Chowk, Old Faridabad – 121002. Mob. 81308-46201.
3. Sh. Gaurav Narang (Owner/Manager – Subh Furniture Works) Shop NO. 141-142, Nr Babbar Electrical, Gopi Colony Chowk, Old Faridabad – 121002.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
PRESENT: Smt. Shruti Sharma, counsel for the Complainant.
Sh. Atul Khatri, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 to 3.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that around 2nd week of February 2020, the complainant. Placed an order with the opposite parties for which the opposite parties visited the complainant’s house to take the measurements as agreed. An advance payment of Rs.5000/- was done on 16.02.2020 by the complainant to the opposite party while placing the order. It was pertinent to mention that the furniture was made on order basis and an order was placed for:
a. Sofa-set worth Rs.28,000/- including GST
b. 2 Storage boxes worth Rs.7500/- including GST.
c. Central table worth Rs.11,500/- including GST
d. Small dinning with 2 stools worth Rs.6000/- including GST.
The opposite parties had assured that they would deliver the same furniture as desired by the complainant’s house by 21.02.2020 which was also mentioned on the rough receipt prepared by the opposite party No.2. Thus, on the assurance give by the opposite party NO.2, the complainant placed an order for a) Sofa-set (b) 2 Storage boxes (c) Central table and (d) Small dining with 2 stools worth Rs.49,000/- inclusive of GST with 10 years warranty and freight extra at actual, out of which an advanced amount of Rs.5000/- on 16.2.2020 was already paid. Opposite party No.2 had assured to provide a warranty card alongwith the bill including GST as agreed at the time of delivery of the total furniture. On 23.02.2020 out of the total order placed, the complainant received the delivery of only a) Sofa-set and b) 2 Storage boxes and had paid Rs.20,000/- at the time of delivery. As agreed to clear the balance, the complainant also exchanged/returned his old sofa and table and the amount of Rs.4000/- for the exchange was deducted
from the total as shown in the rough receipt prepared by opposite party No.2. Another payment of Rs.6500/- towards the balance amount was made by the complainant to the opposite party on 19.05.2020 through online transfer. As per the total calculation the complainant received the delivery of sofa set and 2 storage boxes worth Rs.35,500/- and exchanged/returned old furniture worth Rs.4000/-. Therefore, the complainant paid a total amount of Rs.31,500/- to the opposite parties as quoted by them. But to utter dismay of the complainant, the opposite party informed the complainant an additional GST to be paid on rs.31,500/-. It was submitted that at the time of placing order, the complainant clarified and was informed about the quotation for the furniture includes GST and no other charges would be imposed and only after getting to know the final quotation, the complainant placed order with the opposite parties. Soon after the delivery, the complainant started noticing certain defects in the furniture with regards to its quality which downgraded like stitches of the furniture started breaking and mattress started bulging out, as duly informed to opposite parties Nos.2 & 3 by the complainant. Opposite parties Nos.2 & 3 made false promise/assurance to the complainant that they would get the repair work for the same done. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 01.10.2020 to opposite parties but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) replace the good in question or refund back the amount of Rs.31,500/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of purchase till realization of whole amount..
b) pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 20,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the answering opposite party No.1 was a manufacturer and retailer of home furniture products having its own manufacturing unit working through opposite parties Nos.2 and 3. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 and shows his willness to purchase furniture for his house which includes L shape Sofa Set (5-Seater), Central Table size (4’x2’), Settee size (7’ x 1.5’) with 2 cushions, Table with 2 stool (3’x1.5’). As per the requirement of the complainant, answering opposite party No.2 visited the house of the complainant to take the measurement of sofa set etc. and told him estimate of each item on a plain paper which was L shape Sofa Set (5-Seater) - 28,000/-, central Table size (4’x2’) – 11,500/-, Settee size (7’x1.5’) with 2 cushions – 7,500/-. Table with 2 stool (3’x1.5’) – 6000/-. The total price for all the furniture was assessed at Rs.53,000/-, upon which 18% GST would be payable by the complainant which was agreed by the complainant as well, however complainant requested the answering opposite party No.2 o exchange and adjust the price of his old furniture (sofa set and table) which was agreed by the answering opposite party. Accoridnlgy, complainant replaced the old furniture of the complainant and adjusted the amount of Rs.4,000/- in the total bill. Thus, an amount of Rs.49,000/- including 18% GST was payable by the complainant against the purchase of entire furniture items which was agreed by the complainant and accordingly, complainant confirmed the order and paid an advance amount of Rs.5,000/- through online payment to the answering opposite party. The delivery time for the same was fixed for 21.02.2020 except for Central table which was scheduled for 25.02.2020. Later on, complainant cancelled the Central Table, Table with 2 stools due to his own wish and thus bill was reduced to
Rs.35,500/-. Accordingly, answering opposite party delivered the L Shape Sofa set and 2 Settee size (7’ x1.5’) with 2 cushions to the complainant alongwith bill and asked the complainant to pay the remaining payment of Rs.26,500/- alongwith GST charges, but the complainant had paid Rs.20,000/- through online mode beside freight charges of Rs.600/- but didn’t pay the remaining amount of Rs.6,500/- alongwith GST charges. Thereafter, complainant requested the answering opposite party to replace the sofa legs as one of the sofa legs got broken during the delivery, accordingly answering opposite party replaced all the sofa legs on 09.03.2020. Thereafter, answering opposite party asked the complainant to pay the remaining amount of Rs.6,500/- alongwith GST charges and take the warrant card form his shop, but complainant again sought time for another week for payment but didn’t make the payment. Thereafter, due to outbreak of covid-19 in the world., Government of India had declared its pandemic and declared lockdown in the entire country and in the wake of the pandemic issue and during the period of nationwide lockdown, all markets across India were completely shut down.
Thereafter, on 13.05.2020, answering opposite party requested the complainant to make his outstanding payment, but complainant was adamant to first deliver the warranty card and bill to him against which the answering opposite party clearly appraised the complainant to come and pay the outstanding amount and take the bill alongwith warranty crd. Thereafter, the complainant paid the part payment of Rs.6,500/- through online transfer, but still not make the payment of rs.6,000/- towards GST charges. Thereafter, once again answering opposite party requested the complainant to come and pay the GST charges and take the bill, but complainant didn’t bother to come and didn’t make the GST charges. Opposite party. denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party – Subh Furniture Works with the prayer to : a) replace the good in question or refund back the amount of Rs.31,500/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of purchase till realization of whole amount. b) pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 20,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, affidavit of Gaurav Mangla, Ex.CW-1 – photographs , Ex.CW-2 - rough receipt including GST as prepared by opposite party NO.2, Ex.CW-3 – photo of the defects in furniture,Ex.CW-4 – whatsapp conversation, Ex.CW-5 – Screenshot of whatsapp conversation, Ex.CW-6 – letter dated 01.10.2020.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and
opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shri Kaushal narang, Partner Cum Authorized Signatory, M/s. Shubh Furniture Works, Shop NO. 305/1, Shastri Colony, Old Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – Tax invoice,
6. During the course of arguments, Shri Atul Khatri, counsel for opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 has made a statement that I am ready to replace the sofa set subject to payment of 18% GST as applicable by the complainant.
7. On the basis of the statement of the counsel for the opposite parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is disposed off with the
direction to both the parties that half of the GST i.e 9% will pay by the complainant and half of the GST i.e. 9% will pay by the opposite party. Opposite party is also directed to replace the sofa set with a new one of the same price, subject to return the old sofa set. There are no order as to costs. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 03,08.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
