BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

C.C. No. 31/2020 Filed on 25/01/2020

ORDER DATED: 13/04/2023

ORDER

SRI. VIJU V.R : MEMBER

The complainant has presented this complaint before this Commission under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The brief facts of the case is that the complainant obtained the service of the opposite party for making a digital photo album of good quality and the deal is finalized for Rs.80,000/- & an advance of Rs.1000/- was also paid.  The marriage of the complainant was solemnized on 18/08/2019.  Even though it was agreed by the complainant and the opposite party that the save the date video shoot will be done before 2 weeks from the date of marriage.  But the opposite party has not made any effort to shoot the save the date video on the date agreed.   After that the complainant has given 3 days to the opposite party & the opposite party has agreed for one date for the save the date shoot.  But on the previous date of the agreed date the opposite party informed the complainant that the date has to be postponed as they have got some other work.  It is admitted by the complainant that the save the date video shoot was done in a good manner.  On the marriage date the opposite party missed to take photos of VIPs who attended the marriage.  The complainant has paid Rs.60,000/- on the marriage date itself.  The complainant has given 2 photos of Sai Baba to be affixed on the first page of the album and after that the opposite party called the complainant to come over to the studio for selecting the photos.  The complainant along with his wife selected photos and it was assured by the opposite parties that before taking printout they shall informed the complainant.  The opposite party has handed over the album to the mother of the complainant and received the balance amount from her.  But to the surprise of the complainant it’s understood by the complainant that the album is of very poor quality.  The cover page was not prepared as per the direction of the complainant.  The opposite party instead of affixing Sai Baba’s photo affixed some other photo.  The complainant complained about this to the opposite party and the album was again entrusted to the opposite party for changing the photo as well as the changing the cover page.  The opposite party returned the album to the complainant without consulting with him.  The complainant and his family suffered great mental agony due to the act of the opposite party and they have entrusted the album work to some other person.  The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service, hence this complaint.

The opposite party entered appearance and filed version.  It is admitted by the opposite party that the complainant have agreed for Rs.80,000/- for covering the marriage function and they received Rs.10,000/- as advance.  It is contented by the opposite party that they have made the save the date video on the convenient dated proposed by the complainant.  The marriage functions as well as the reception function were completely shooted by the opposite party without any complaint from the complainant.   It is also admitted by the opposite party that the photos were selected by the complainant and his wife for making album.  After that the album was handed over to the complainant.  After that as per the direction from the complainant the opposite party was constrained to change the photos of Sai Baba as well as the cover page which caused additional financial loss to the opposite party.  The complainant has no other complaint about the quality of the photographs before filing this complaint.   It is not a usual practice to give unedited videos of marriage and unedited videos of reception to the customer.  The opposite parties had acted as per the agreement between the complainant and the opposite party.   There is no deficiency in service from the side of the opposite party, hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost. 

Issues to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the side of opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs?

Issues (i) & (ii):- Both these issues are considered together for the sake of convenience.  The complainant has filed proof affidavit and has produced 3 documents which were marked as Exts.P1 to P3.  The opposite party also filed proof affidavit.  the opposite party has filed argument note.   It is admitted by the opposite party that he had received Rs.80,000/- from the complainant to cover the marriage function of the complainant as well as other related functions.  The allegation raised by the complainant is that the opposite party has not given good quality digital photo album to the complainant.  It is also alleged by the complainant that the save the date video was not shooted on the date proposed by the complainant.  The complainant has not taken any effort to prove that the digital photo album was not having good quality.  The complainant ought to have taken an expert opinion to establish his allegation that digital photo album was not of good quality.  The onus to prove that there was deficiency in service is on the complainant.  But in this case the complainant has not produced the best evidence in support of his allegations.  If the complainant is able to discharge his initial onus, the burden, would then shift to the opposite party.  Therefore the initial burden to prove the deficiency in service was on the complainant.  The complainant has not produced the best evidence which he was expected to produce in respect of digital photo album.  In these circumstances the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the opposite party. 

In the result the complaint is dismissed.  There will be no order as to cost. 

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 13^th   day of April,  2023.

            Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN                 : PRESIDENT 

          Sd/-

PREETHA G. NAIR              : MEMBER    

         Sd/-

                                                                 VIJU V.R                          : MEMBER

 C.C. No. 31/2020

APPENDIX

  I         COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

II          COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

III         OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

IV        OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

        Sd/-

PRESIDENT