CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM Present Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member CC No. 135/10 Wednesdaythe 10th day, of November , 2010 Petitioner : Nandanan, Mundackal House, Kavumpadi, Manarcadu P.O Kottayam. Opposite party : Joseph Thalickal, (Impleaded as per Syon Tailors, Order in IA 716/10 Thottiyil Building, Dtd: 30..10..2010) Malam P.O, Kottayam. O R D E R Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Case of the petitioner, filed on 29..5..2010, is as follows: Opposite party is conducting a tailoring shop under the name and style as ‘Syon tailors’. Petitioner entrusted two pieces of cloth having measurement of 1 ½ meter and 2 meter to the opposite party for stitching shirts. At the time of entrustment of cloth pieces opposite party assured that the same is enough for stitching 2 shirts. Opposite party promised the petitioner that the stitched shirt will be returned to the petitioner on 30..4..2010. upon wearing , on delivery of shirts, petitioner noticed that, the 2 shirts are being not properly stitched. When the petitioner complained about the fact of im proper stitching. Opposite party behaved to the petitioner in an indecent manner. According to the petitioner act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. Due to the deficiency committed by the opposite party, petitioner sustained a loss of Rs. 500/- being -2- the cost of the cloth piece and Rs. 170/- as stitching charge. So, petitioner prays for a direction to the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs. 670/- along with compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and cost of the proceedings. Notice was sent to the opposite party since the notice was returned with an endorsement ‘no such addressee’ petitioner filed IA- 716/10 for amending the petition with correct address of the petitioner . IA 716/10 allowed notice was served to the opposite party but he has not entered appearance or filed any written version. So, opposite party was set ex-parte. Points for considerations are: i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? ii) Reliefs and costs? Evidence in this case consists of sole deposition of the petitioner. Point No. 1 Petitioner deposed in the box that he entrusted the opposite party two shirt pieces for stitching. After the stitching the shirts were not able to be used. Two shirts were having no proper length and width and is not useful for the purpose of a fit shirts. Since the opposite party was set ex-parte. The case of the petitioner was unchallenged and we are constrain to allow the petition. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly. Point No. 2 In view of the finding in point No. 1, petition is allowed. Opposite party is ordered to pay the petitioner an amount of Rs. 670/-. Without saying what had happened caused much convenience and sufferings to the petitioner. So, opposite -3- party is ordered to pay an amount of Rs. 750/- as compensation. Opposite party is ordered to pay Rs. 250/- as litigation cost. Order shall be complied with within one month of receipt of a copy of this order. If the order is not complied as directed, petitioner is entitled for 12% interest for the award amount from the date of filing of the petition till realization. Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 10th day of November, 2010. Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Document for the petitioner Nil PW1 Nanthanan. By Order, Senior Superintendent Despatched on / Received on amp/ 4 cs. | 
