Complaint No: 135 of 2020.

                                                                Date of Institution: 12.11.2020.

                                                                         Date of order: 11.03.2024.

Sh. Hardit Singh Mangat Advocate Son of Sh. Pal Singh, resident of House No. B -13/223 Guru Teg Bahadur Colony and at present Chamber No. 72, New Judicial Court Complex, Batala, Tehsil Batala District Gurdaspur. Pin 143505.

                                                                                                                                                                          …......Complainant.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

                                                                                    VERSUS

Sunil Gupta Proprietor / Manager Gupta Plywood and Furniture Store Lakkad Mandi Batala, Tehsil Batala District Gurdaspur. Pin 143505.

                                                                                                                                                                              ….Respondent.

                                      Complaint Under Section 35 of The Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh.Makhan Singh, Advocate. 

              For the Opposite Party: Sh.Gaurav Mahajan, Advocate.   

Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.

          Hardit Singh, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against Sunil Gupta (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite party).

2.       Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is practicing as an Advocate since long and is Law abiding Citizen and having reputation and respect in the society and the opposite party is authorized distributor of Century Ply & Laminate and Suppliers of PU- Foam, Kurl-on Covered Mattress, Euro Laminate, ACP Sheets, Plywood, Wallpaper, Cloth, Pillows etc. It is pleaded that on dated 16.06.2020 the complainant alongwith his son Karmjit Singh Mangat and Mistry Dharam Singh went to the shop of the opposite party for purchasing one plywood sheet for the purpose of making outer gate of his house. Sh. Sunil Gupta showed different types of plywood sheets to the complainant and the complainant selected one 6 MM Sheets of 'STAYLAN' make. The opposite party told the price of the sheet amounting to Rs.10,255/- to the complainant and also proclaimed that guarantee of the sheet is 10 years for any kind of defect in the sheet. It is further pleaded that the complainant paid the price and the opposite party issued a bill by deducting the relevant GST of 18 %  i.e. 9 % to the state and 9 % to the center by mentioning its active price of Rs.8,690/-. The complainant carried the goods purchased and bill to his house. The complainant is the consumer of the opposite party. It is further pleaded that at home when the complainant read the bill thoroughly and carefully, then it is found by the complainant that the opposite party intentionally, fraudulently and willfully did not mentioned the guarantee period on the bill, as told by the opposite party to the complainant at the time of purchasing the above said sheet. It is further pleaded that on the next day, the complainant approached the opposite party and the opposite party asked the complainant that if the complainant wants any bill alongwith guarantee, the complainant should contact their head office at Chandigarh and the opposite party refused to give the guarantee period of 10 years. The complainant requested the opposite party that the complainant has purchased the goods from the opposite party and paid the amount of goods to the opposite part. So, the opposite party is bound / required to give the guarantee period on the bill. It is further pleaded that the opposite party threatened the complainant that the opposite party will not give any guarantee and the opposite party do not care any body and the complainant can approached anywhere, he likes. The opposite party also misbehaved with the complainant against the manners. The opposite party also harassed the complainant mentally and physically. It is further pleaded that the complainant also issued a Legal Notice dated 13.07.2020 to the opposite party posted on dated 14.07.2020 stating the facts in the notice, but the opposite party through his counsel gave the evasive reply to the notice. It is further pleaded that there is an absolute deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the opposite party intentionally, willfully and fraudulently has not given guarantee as told by the opposite party at the time of purchasing the sheets and has defrauded the complainant. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite party the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. It is further pleaded that there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. 

          On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite party to pay the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- detailed as Rs.1,00,000/- as damages and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses and also the opposite party may be directed to issue a fresh bill mentioning the guarantee period on the bill of the goods purchased, in the interest of justice.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filing their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable in the present form and the complaint of the complainant is bad for non-joinder of the necessary parties. It is pleaded that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint against the answering opposite party, as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering opposite party. It is further pleaded that the matter of the fact is that the guarantee of the product if any is to be provided by the Manufacturer and not by the Seller / Trader. The product which was purchased by the complainant through the answering opposite party of the Century Ply and Laminate comes with a warranty of 10 years by the manufacturer, but for availing the same, the policy of the company is that the customer has to click photographs of the installed product and send it to the company for verification and after verification the company issues the Warranty Card / Certificate to the customer, but even though the answering opposite party going out of the way, helped the complainant and forwarded the photographs of the installed product of the complainant to the Manufacturer and thereafter the Manufacturer had issued the Warranty Certificate of the product installed. It is further pleaded that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint against the answering opposite party just to harass and humiliate the answering opposite party.

          On merits, the opposite party has reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. 

4.       Learned counsel for the complainant has placed on file affidavit of Hardit Singh Mangat, (Complainant) as Ex.C-1 alongwith other documents as Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-5 alongwith complaint.

5.       Learned counsel for the opposite party has placed on file affidavit of Sh. Sunil Gupta S/o Balwant Rai, (Proprietor of Gupta Plywood and Furniture Store, Gurdaspur) as Ex.OPW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-2 alongwith reply.

6.       Rejoinder not filed by the complainant. 

7.       Written arguments not filed by both the parties.  

8.       Ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that  on 16.06.2020 the complainant purchased  one plywood sheet 6 MM Sheets of 'STAYLAN' make for  Rs.10,255/- from opposite party vide bill Ex C2 and complainant was given guarantee of the sheet is 10 years for any kind of defect in the sheet. It is further argued that on reaching home the complainant noticed that opposite party had not anything about warranty of 10 years as promised on the bill. It is further argued that on the next day, the complainant approached the opposite party and the opposite party told the complainant that if the complainant wants any bill alongwith guarantee, the complainant should approach their head office at Chandigarh and the opposite party refused to give the guarantee period of 10 years, the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. It is further argued that during the pendency of the compliant, the opposite party has placed on record on guarantee document Ex OP 1 dated 21.12.2020 but till date the original has not been handed over to the complainant.

9.       On the other hand counsel for the opposite party has argued that complainant is bad for non-joinder of the necessary parties. It is further argued  that the guarantee of the product if any is to be provided by the Manufacturer and not by the Seller / Trader and the product which was purchased by the complainant through the answering opposite party of the Century Ply and Laminate comes with a warranty of 10 years by the manufacturer, but for availing the same, the policy of the company is that the customer has to click photographs of the installed product and send it to the company for verification and after verification the company issues the Warranty Card / Certificate to the customer, but even though the answering opposite party going out of the way, helped the complainant and forwarded the photographs of the installed product of the complainant to the Manufacturer and thereafter the Manufacturer had issued the Warranty Certificate of the product installed copy of which is attached with the reply Ex OP 1, and the compliant is liable to be dismissed.

10.     We have heard the counsels for the parties and gone through record.

11.     To prove his case complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1, copy of invoice Ex.C2, copy of legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipt Ex.C4. On the other hand counsel for the opposite party has placed on record affidavit of Sunil Gupta Ex.OPW-1/A, Copy of warranty certificate Ex OP-1, copy of reply to legal notice Ex OP-2.

12.     It is admitted fact that on 16.06.2020 the complainant purchased  one plywood sheet 6 MM Sheets of 'STAYLAN' make for  Rs.10,255/- from opposite party vide bill Ex C2 and complainant was given guarantee of the sheet is 10 years for any kind of defect in the sheet. Only disputed issue between the parties whether the warranty was to be provided by the opposite party alongwith the invoice or not. Perusal of record shows that invoice Ex C2 shows that document is totally silent about the promised guarantee and it is no where mentioned that warranty is to be given by the company after product is installed with proof of installation. As such we are of the view that not mentioning any such condition on the invoice and failure to provide warranty as promised amounts to deficiency in service and business malpractice. Perusal of warranty certificate Ex OP 1 shows that same has been issued on 21-12-2020, where as the present complaint was filed on 12-11-2020. Even till today the opposite party has failed to hand over the original warranty certificate to the complainant, copy of which is placed on record as Ex OP 1. Even term No.5 of the warranty certificate states that for availing the same, the policy of the company is that the customer has to click photographs of the installed product and send it to the company for verification and only then warranty will considered. Failing to do so documents hold no reference. Which itself shows that warranty certificate was to be issued at the time of purchase and it is valid only if photographs of the same are sent to the company after installation. As such we are of view that failure to hand over warranty certificate to the complainant by the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and business malpractice.  

13.     Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party is directed to pay the amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation on account of mental tension and harassment and opposite party is further directed to hand over original of certificate Ex OP 1 to the complainant within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order. However, it is made clear that if order is not complied with, within 30 days period as stated above the amount of Rs.5,000/- shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till realization.

14.     The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

15.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.                                                                                                                                                               

            (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

                                                                                      President.  

Announced:                                                   (B.S.Matharu)

March 11, 2024                                                     Member.

*YP*