By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an Order directing the opposite party to pay Rs.2,000/- with 18% interest from 22.10.2011 till realization being the advance amount received from complainant and to pay Rs.10,000/- as loss and damages and Rs.1,500/- as cost of the proceedings.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant approached the opposite party for purchase of one door for Rs.10,000/- for a newly constructed house and gave Rs.2,000/- as advance and offered the door within one month. After completion of house, the complainant contacted the
opposite party for getting door that opposite party availed time for supply of door. But the opposite party said one or other excuses till 15.12.2012 and then they said the door could be supplied after one month. The complainant was no other way but purchased door from Muscot Marketing, nearest to the shop of opposite party. The Mascot marketing told that the material is very good quality and door has 25 years warranty. But it is a low quality door and complainant filed another complaint against Mascot Marketing. The opposite party did not refund advance amount. The act of opposite party is unfair trade practice. Hence filed this complaint.
3. On receipt of complaint, notice was issued to opposite party and opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version the opposite party admitted the receipt of Rs.2,000/- as advance amount. But the opposite party stated that the advance amount is received for the supply of one steel door and one PVC door. After one week, the complainant approached the opposite party and informed that he want to cancel his steel door. For the advance amount of Rs.2,000/- a PVC door worth the same amount was given to him. When complainant canceled the Order, the steel door was become dead stock to the opposite party and opposite party sustained loss.
4. On perusal of complaint, version and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and document is marked as Ext.A1. Opposite party filed proof affidavit and is examined as OPW1. Ext.A1 is the receipt issued by opposite party to the complainant when he remit the advance amount. The opposite party in the version stated that the opposite party supplied a PVC door to the complainant worth Rs.2,000/- towards the advance amount. But the case of the complainant is that the opposite party did not refund Rs.2,000/- to the complainant and the opposite party did not give PVC door to the complainant as stated in the version. The opposite party when cross-examined by the complainant in the box, the opposite party deposed that the opposite party gave back the advance amount of Rs.2,000/- in cash to the complainant at opposite party's shop. So the opposite party have different version and the Forum found that opposite party no specific case. By analyzing the entire evidences, according to the Forum, it can be safely concluded that the opposite party did not give back either PVC door worth Rs.2,000/- or Rs.2,000/- in cash. The opposite party did not produce any cogent and convincing evidence to prove their case. Ext.A1 is very clear that the opposite party accepted Rs.2,000/- as advance from the complainant on 22.10.2011. The complainant succeeded in proving his case. So the Forum found that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency of service from the part of opposite party. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since Point No.1 is found in favour of complainant, the complainant is entitled to get the cost and compensation.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) only to the complainant with 12% interest from 22.10.2011 till realization. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party shall comply the Order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of April 2015.
Date of Filing:03.06.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Salu. T. A. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:-
OPW1. Hassan Basheer. Business.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Receipt. dt:22.10.2011.
Exhibits for the opposite parties:-
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
