Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 31.03.2016
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite party to immediately replace the 3 seater sofa with a brand new one (thoroughly packed and sealed).
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
It is the case of the complainant that he has purchased 5 items from opposite party on 21.05.2011 which are as follows, 1. Godrej Zurina King Bed (66), 2. Godrej Dara Wall unit (3017), 3. Godrej Rea Dining Chair., 4. Godrej Loretta dining Table, 5. Godrej Parto Sofa Set (3+1+1) after paying the total price of Rs. 1,22,421/- (vide annexure – 1.) The aforesaid items were delivered by opposite party at the complainant’s address on 23.05.2011 and 12.06.2011 in packed and sealed condition.
It is further case of the complainant that after delivery of the aforesaid items the workmen of opposite party visited the residence on 25.05.2011 and on 02.06.2011 to uncover and fitting of aforesaid articles. It was found that when Godrej Coffee table Glow was uncovered by the workmen of opposite party, it was found in pieces which was later replaced by the opposite party.
The complainant on 04.06.2011 noticed that one of the four legs of Godrej Parto Sofa ( 3 seater ) was broken. This fact was immediately reported to the opposite party in order to replace the same as the aforesaid items were purchased by the complainant to gift the same to his daughter on her wedding.
The complainant has made several requests to opposite party for replacing the same.
Thereafter on 22.06.2011 the opposite party sent a 3 seater Sofa in the evening which was neither packed nor sealed which later on found to be old and did not bear the sign of newness. The complainant found that the aforesaid sofa was not in good condition and as such he immediately rejected the same and thereafter opposite party gave assurance that it will be replaced. The opposite party even tried to mislead and cheat the complainant by sending some old sofa in next 2 weeks and wanted to settle this matter anyhow.
It is the case of the complainant that he has paid the full amount of the aforesaid sofa i.e. Rs. 40,805.16/- for Godrej Parto Sofa Set (3+1+1) but the opposite party instead of giving new sofa has all the time tried to cheat the complainant by sending old sofa.
Thereafter the complainant has sent a notice to the opposite party for redressal of his grievance.
From record it further appears that the complainant has also filed a petition in which he has prayed to allow / add the cost to the tune of Rs. 1,45,000/- besides costs etc.
On behalf of opposite party a Vakalatnama was filed on 20.06.2012 but despite allowing several adjournments when no written statement was filed then the case has been heard exparte.
It is needless to say that by not supplying new brand sofa to the complainant, opposite party has committed deficiency in the service hence we direct the opposite party to replace the 3 seater sofa with a brand new one in sealed and packed condition within the aforesaid period of one months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite party will have to pay an interest @ 12% on price of aforesaid sofa i.e. Rs. 40,805.16/- till the aforesaid order is complied.
It is also made clear that while receiving the new sofa complainant will hand over the old sofa to the opposite party if the same is in his possession.
We further direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the aforesaid period of one months.
Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
Member President
