Date of Filing:18.09.2008<br /> Date of Order:19.12.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2045 OF 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> Dr. Diwakar<br /> S-1823, II Phase, II Block<br /> Behind Sai Mandir School<br /> Rajajinagar, Bangalore 560 010 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> Suman Shudda Abharana Pvt. Ltd.<br /> No. 494, UP Royal Complex<br /> 4th Cross, Sampige Road<br /> Malleswaram, Bangalore 560 003<br /> Rept. By its Manager Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. <br /> The facts of the case are that the complainant has purchased six different gold ornaments at the total cost of Rs. 1,72,315/- on 04.03.2008 from the opposite party. While purchasing gold items the opposite party has assured that his products are good quality and same were guaranteed against breakage, damage, colour and in case of any complaint he will attend to the same or replace the same with equally good item. With the said assurance the complainant had opted to purchase the ornaments by paying huge amount. The item No. 1 is the 916 gold bangles weighing 26.21 gms worth Rs. 37,500/-. When the complainant’s sister wanted to use the said bangles on a close observation she observed that bangles had visible cracks and manufacturing defect. Hence, on 06.03.2008 the complainant brought the bangles to the opposite party shop. Opposite party bluntly, harshly, inhumanly and illogically refused to accept and entertain the complaint. Opposite party had agreed to take back the bangles for repairs and complainant should bear the repair charges. This is a strange, rude and unwelcoming response from the opposite party to his esteemed customers. The adamant attitude has caused immense mental agony and injury to the complainant and his family members. He has also alleged that the staff of the opposite party abused the complainant and his family members in a filthy language. Complainant had issued legal notice dated 11.06.2008. Inspite of legal notice the opposite party has failed to comply the demand made in the legal notice. Therefore, the complainant has approached this forum for seeking justice with a prayer that the opposite party may be directed to replace the gold ornament Item No. 1 worth Rs. 37,500/- with a equally good gold ornament or to refund the amount with interest on the said amount at 12% p.a. with effect from 04.03.2008 and the second prayer of the complainant is that opposite party be directed to pay damages of Rs. 50,000/- for causing mental agony, insult and humiliation.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party by RPAD. In pursuance of the notice issued by this forum the opposite party has appeared in person and submitted defence version stating that gold bangles purchased by the complainant were ready made and displayed in the showroom. After selection they were delivered to the complainant. Three months after purchasing the customer came with the damaged bangles and demanded exchange. The opposite party informed the customer that damaged jewellery could not be exchanged and could only be repaired on payment of repair charges. The customer did not agree to this and insisted for exchange. The opposite party submitted that they should not be held responsible. To keep cordial relations with the customers they are ready to repair by charging reasonable amount.<br /> 3. The complainant has filed affidavit evidence. When the case was posted for filing of affidavit evidence of opposite party on 03.12.2008 opposite party was not present and affidavit evidence by opposite party not filed. Hence, posted for arguments to 16.12.2008. On that date arguments for learned advocate of complainant was heard. Opposite party was not present and nobody appeared on behalf of opposite party. After hearing the arguments of the learned advocate for the complainant case was posted for orders.<br /> 4. I have gone through the complaint, affidavit evidence of the complainant and documents.<br /> 5. It is admitted case of the parties that the complainant has purchased gold ornaments at a total cost of Rs. 1,72,315/- from the opposite party. To that effect Tax Invoice No. 10077 dated 04.03.2008 is produced. The first item gold bangles net weight 26.21 gms worth Rs. 37,500/- has been purchased under the above invoice. Regarding purchase of gold bangles from the opposite party shop there is no dispute. The opposite party in the defence version has clearly admitted this fact. It is the case of the complainant that after purchase they went to the home and the complainant sister wanted to use the bangles. On a very close observation she observed that bangles had visible cracks and having manufacturing defect. Therefore, with that condition it is not safer and proper to wear the bangles. On 06.03.2008 the complainant approached the opposite party shop with the said bangles. Opposite party bluntly and harshly refused to accept and entertain the complaint and it is the case of the complainant that the opposite party behaved in rude and uncivilized manner with the complainant. The opposite party refused to replace the gold bangles by taking defective bangles. The complainant got issued legal notice through advocate Kashinath explaining all the facts and demanding replacement of the bangles and for payment of Rs 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. The complainant admitted in the defence version receipt of the legal notice. Even after receipt of notice the opposite party has not replied to the notice and request of the complainant was not complied. Therefore, the complainant was forced to approach the Fora for getting justice. It is very unfortunate that the opposite party being a very big jeweler in Bangalore have behaved in rude manner with the customers. The opposite party is not entitled in law under the guise printed at the bottom of the bill that “Jewellery once sold cannot be returned or exchanged”. This mental set up on the part of the service provider or manufacturer or opposite party must be changed. Customer is the king. His satisfaction is utmost duty of the service provider. Customer is the most important visitor in the premises of opposite party. He is not dependent on opposite party. On the other hand the opposite party is dependent on customers. The opposite party should have apologized and attended the complaint of the complainant immediately once the defect was brought to the notice of the opposite party in the ornament. Very few customers’ complain. This is because people cannot afford to invest time and energy in the process. In this case the complainant is a Doctor by profession. He has made some allegation against the opposite party in respect of the treatment given to him by the staff of the opposite party shop. The rude, inhuman and rough behaviour of the staff of opposite party with the complainant who is an esteemed customer is really bad. The customers should be respected and given due regard. The complainant is a customer worth retaining. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation which has been enacted to safe guard the better interest of the consumers. The opposite party has failed to give proper response to the complaint of the complainant. The opposite party in this case instead of defensive would have apologized for the inconvenience caused to the customer. The complainant brought the gold bangles for verification and examination by the forum. The Hon’ble Lady Member when she was examining the bangles in the open court one of the bangle broke down in the open court itself. That means the quality of the bangles was so poor and it has been demonstrated that the bangle was defective. Under these circumstances it is just, fair and reasonable that the complainant is entitled for the refund of the amount of Rs. 37,500/- paid towards purchase of gold bangles. The opposite party shall have to refund the amount with interest. The complainant has sought Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony, humiliation and inconvenience caused to him. On the facts and circumstances of the case I feel ends of justice will be met in awarding Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and inconvenience. Apart from refund of Rs. 37,500/-, the complainant is also entitled for Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of the present proceedings from the opposite party. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The Complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 37,500/- the cost of the gold bangles Item No. 1 as shown in Invoice No. 10077 dated 04.03.2008 to the complainant along with 12% interest p.a. on the said amount from 04.03.2008 till payment / realization. <br /> 7. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental agony and inconvenience apart from the above relief.<br /> 8. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as costs of the present proceedings to the complainant.<br /> 9. The complainant shall have to give back the bangles to the opposite party after receiving refund and compensation amount.<br /> 10. The opposite party is directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order.<br /> 11. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 12. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2008. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />