IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 26th day of March, 2013.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C.No.17/2013 (Filed on 01.02.2013)
Between:
Muhammad Ajmal,
Alayil House,
Fathimapuram.P.O.,
Changanassery. …. Complainant
And:
SYLCON,
Neha Leather,
TMJ Building,
Ramanchira,
Thiruvalla – 689 101. …. Opposite party
O R D E R
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President):
The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite party for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. The complainant’s case is that he had purchased a pair of chappal from the opposite party for Rs. 1,685 on 31.12.2012 vide bill No.114136. After two weeks of use, while using the chappal, something like white foam came out from the chappal, when it became wet and that foam spread over to the cloth and thereby he could not use the chappal and cloth. So, on 22.01.2013, he came to the shop of the opposite party and told about the problems and requested for settling his complaints which was not yielded by the opposite party. Moreover, at that time, opposite party behaved badly to the complainant in front of other customers and the staff of the opposite parties. The above said act of the opposite party caused mental agony and financial loss to the complainant which is a clear deficiency in service and the opposite party is liable to the complainant for the same. Hence this complaint for an order directing the opposite party for replacing the defective chappal along with compensation of Rs. 5,000.
3. In this case, opposite party is exparte.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the complainant, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
5. The evidence of this complaint consists of the oral deposition of PW1 and Ext.A1. After closure of evidence, complainant was heard.
6. The Point:- The complainant’s allegation is that opposite party sold a defective chappal to the complainant. After a few days of use, complainant noticed the defects of the chappal and approached the opposite party for redressing the grievances of the complainant. But opposite party denied the request of the complainant. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and the opposite party is liable to the complainant.
7. In order to prove the case of the complainant, complainant adduced oral evidence as PW1 and produced one document which was marked as Ext.A1. Ext.A1 is the cash bill No.114136 dated 31.12.2012 for Rs. 1,685 issued by the opposite party showing the sale of the chappal.
8. On a perusal of the deposition of PW1 and Ext.A1, it is seen that the complainant had purchased a pair of chappal for Rs.1,685 from the opposite party. It is also seen from the deposition and the complaint, the chappal purchased by the complainant is defective and the request of the complainant for the replacement of the defective chappal was also not yielded by the opposite party.
9. Since the opposite party is exparte, we find no reasons to disbelieve the allegations of the complainant and hence the complainant’s case stands proved as unchallenged. So we find that the act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and the opposite party is liable to the complainant for the same. Therefore, this complaint is allowable.
10. In the result, this complaint is allowed thereby the opposite party is directed to replace the complainant’s chappal along with Rs. 5000 (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation to the complainant within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize a cost of the chappal and the compensation ordered with 10% interest from today till the realization of the whole amount.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 26th day of March, 2013.
(Sd/-)
Jacob Stephen,
(President)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : Muhammed Ajmal
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Cash bill No.114136 dated 31.12.2012 for Rs. 1,685 issued
by the opposite party to the complainant
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party:
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent.
Copy to:- (1) Muhammad Ajmal, Alayil House, Fathimapuram.P.O.,
Changanassery.
(2) SYLCON, Neha Leather, TMJ Building, Ramanchira,
Thiruvalla – 689 101.
(3) The Stock File.
