DATE OF FILING: 12.12.2011.
DATE OF DISPOSAL: 16.5.2016.
Dr. Alaka Mishra, Member (W)
Deficiency in service against the Opposite Party is the grievance of the complainant.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that she purchased two numbers of L.G. Air conditioners i.e. one on 1.3.2011 and another on 30.5.2011 from Saheel Elecronics, situated at One Way Traffic Road, Berhampur which has been installed on 30.5.2011 by the Opposite Party through Narayan Nayak, Engineer and Authorized Signatory has received an amount of Rs.3,960/- vide Cheque No.144031 dated 7.6.2011 of State Bank of India, Main Branch, Berhampur towards installation charges, purchase of stand and pipe for two sets showing categorically at Rs.1760/- towards installation charges, Rs.1300/- for purchase of stand and Rs.900/- for pipe in total Rs.3960/- but on demand by the complainant and her husband the authorized signatory did not grant cash memo/ Bill for the said amount for which she was compelled to send letters on 13.6.2011 to the O.P. through courier service tax and cash memo showing the purchase of stand and pipe. Though the Opposite Party received the same on 15.6.2011 but kept quite and did not send any reply and thereafter the complainant sent letters again by R.P. with A.D. on 20.6.2011 which has been received by O.P. and lastly on 1.7.2011 another letter was also sent to him but Inspite of several letters the O.P. kept quite with his oblique motive and thereafter on her behalf one legal demand notice was sent on 12.11.2011 by R.P. with A.D. requesting the O.P. to issue cash memo and bill for an amount of Rs.3960/- in favour of the complainant to which the O.P. received the same but did not choose to send any reply with his oblique motive which shows the adamant nature of O.P. The complainant being a lady have been harassed by Opposite Party who suffered mentally, physically, financially due to the deficiency of service caused by the O.P. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to issue cash memo and Service tax bill for an amount of Rs.3960/-, Compensation of Rs.5000/- towards mental agony and financial loss and Rs.1000/- towards litigation expenses in the best interest of justice.
3. Notice was issued against the Opposite Party but he intentionally neither chooses to appear nor filed any written version. Hence he is declared set exparte on dated 16.3.2016.
4. On the date of final hearing the learned counsel for the complainant was present and the O.P. was absent since the Opposite Party was set exparte on dated 16.3.2016.
5. We heard argument at length from the learned counsel for the complainant and we have also gone through the complaint petition, written argument and documents filed by the advocate for complainant. We have also perused the case record and verified the vital documents. During the course of hearing learned counsel for complainant contended that he has paid Rs.3960/- towards installation of A.C. and other accessories but the O.P. did not prefer to issue a money receipt/cash memo/Bill as demanded by the complainant. He also contended that despite several request he did not issue the same. Hence the O.P. is deficient in service and caused harassment and mental agony to the complainant.
6. We perused the above pleading of the learned counsel for the complainant and verified the document to corroborate the contention. On perusal of the case record, it is found that the installation engineer of the O.P. issued a installation report where he has mentioned that he has received the amount of Rs.3960/- towards installation of A.C. and charges for accessories. At the same time we are found that on the body of installation report the representative of complainant has expressed her dissatisfaction of installation. It is also a fact that and the main contention of the complaint is non-issuance of proper money receipt by the O.P. even after receipt of Rs.3960/-. From the aforesaid discussion we found that the O.P. received Rs.3960/- but on several requests made by the complainant the O.P. did not give any heed to his grievance. Above all the Opposite Party did not issue money receipts even after filing of the consumer complaint and notice from this Forum.
In the light of above discussion, facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that there is clear deficiency in service by the Opposite Party and his attitude not to give money receipt amounts to unfair trade practices.
In the result, we order that the Opposite Party shall issue money receipt together with litigation cost of Rs.500/- ( Rupees five hundred) only to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to recover the same U/S 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The case is disposed off accordingly.
Order is pronounced in the open Forum today on 16th May 2016.
Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
