Orissa

Rayagada

CC/88/2021

Sri Sudeepta Kumar Mohapatra - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Aradhana Sarees Manufacture & Dealers - Opp.Party(s)

Self

30 Jul 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    COMMISSION, AT: KASTURINAGAR, IST. LANE,  LIC OFFICE BACK,  PO/DIST: RAYAGADA,  5.4.

STATE:  ODISHA.765  001.

…

                                                            C.C. Case  No.   88       / 2021

   Sri    Sudeepto  Kumar   Mohapatra,    Near Jagannath Complex, Collectorate  Road,  Po/Dist: Rayagada , 765 001  (Odisha).

Cell No. 7978076647.                                                      …. Complainant.

Versus.

The Manager,  Aradhana  Sarees,  Manufacturer and dealers in Exclusive Banarasi silk and printed Sarees,   B-21/33, Raj   apartment Kamachha, Varanasi-221010.        Cell No.  9236156174.                                              …..  Opposite  parties.

ORDER  DATED. 30.7.2021.

The  crux of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non  supply  of  good  quality  Banarasi  Silk Sarees  for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

Undisputedly the  complainant had  purchased  Handloom Goods    i.e.  Banarasi  Silk  Sarees  from  the O.P  vide  Invoice  No. 428  Dt. 31.3.2021  and  received  consideration a sum of Rs.4,500/-(copies of the  invoice  is  available  in the file which is marked  as Annexure-I).

On being noticed the  O.Ps  has  supplied  new  Sarees  to the complainant  which the complainant  admitted   during the course of hearing  before the Commission. Further  the O.P has  also sent another Saree   to the  complainant which  price  was Rs.7,800/- and the O.P.  has demanded   the same price from the complainant.

On perusal of the record we observed that  the complainant made several complaints with the O.Ps pointing out the defects in Sarees  which goes on to show that  right from  the very beginning  which was intimated by the complainant.   Further we observed that  on repeated complaints made  by the complainant to the O.Ps neither the exchange  have been made nor replaced  with a new  Saree. We observed  inspite of  required  request made  with in the  warranty  period  the above Sarees could not be exchanged.  We  hold   at this stage if the above Sarees found damage   then it can be presumed that it has a manufacturing defect. If a defective Saree  is supplied a consumer   is entitled to get refund of the price of the  Saree or to replaced  with a new Saree and also the consumer concerned is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost to meet the mental agony. In the instant case as it appears that the  above  Sarees which was purchased by the complainant which had found  defects and the O.Ps were unable to exchange during the warranty period.

             It appears that the complainant invested a substantial amount and purchased the above  Sarees  with an expectation to have the effective benefit of use of the above good. In this case the complainant was deprived of getting beneficial use   of the goods  and deprived of using the above goods for such a long time and the defect Sarees were not exchanged  by the O.Ps who could know the defects from time to time from the complainant. In the instant case the O.P   is  liable.                                WARNING  TO  THE  O.P.

The  O.P  is    directed   not  to supply  defective  Sarees  to the  consumers  in future and supply  good  quality  to the consumers  in   every  time . Supply   of   defective  Sarees  to the  complainant  which  is unfair  trade  practice  and  liable   for payment  of  penalty  and imprisonment  as  per  C.P. Act,2019.

To avoid  penalty and  imprisonment  you should  supply  good  quality  Sarees  to the consumers  in every  time  and not to repeat   the same in future.

In  the instant case  the  O.P is directed not take back the defective  Saree  from the complainant as the same  defective  Saree  had sent to the proper  authority  for quality  examination. Further the O.P has no right  to collect a sum of  Rs.7,800/- from the complainant  and  the complainant also not to pay   Rs.7,800/-  to the O.P. for  indulging  unfair  trade practice. Accordingly  the  case is closed.  Parties  are left to bear their  own cost.

 Dictated and corrected  by me.  Pronounced on 30^th.  Day  of July, 2021.

PRESIDENT.