CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM Present Sri.Santhosh Kesavanath.P. President Smt.Bindhu M.Thomas Member Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan Member.
CC.No.380/09 Saturday, the day of 27th, February, 2010.
Petitioner Adv. Shybi Alen Kannampadom house Kidangoor South P.O. Kottayam. (Adv.Sunny Mathew) Vs. Opposite party The Owner/Proprietor Cotton India, Near Y.W.C.A. M.C.Road, Kottayam-1. H/O M.G.Road, Ernakulam Tin No.32071699574.C.
O R D E R Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan, Member.
The case of the complainant is as follows. On 6/11/2009 the complainant purchased two churidars from the Kottayam showroom of the opposite party for an amount of Rs.2629/- (ie. Art label churidar Rs.1130/- and Helima churidar Rs.1499/- total Rs. 2629/-). The complainant had purchased the churidar on the assurance given by the opposite party as good quality. On 16/11/2009 the complainant and his two sisters were attend the marriage function. When the unexpected rain come and the colour of the churidar diluted and the same was not useful. The complainant had purchased the churidar on the words and assurances were given by the opposite party as the goods are in good quality. He had approached the opposite party on the very next day of function 17/11/2009 and explained the thing what was happened and he demanded for exchange the product or refund the price of it. But the opposite party has taken adament stand and also insult the complainant. -2- There was a clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint. The notice was served with the opposite party. They did not appear either in person on through their concluded even after accepting the notice from this forum. Hence the opposite party set ex parte. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents which are marked as exhibits A1 to A4. Heard complainant. We have gone through the complaint, documents and evidence. The churidar materials produced before this forum at the time of hearing and the same was returned to the party after examining. The visible colour change was shown in the churidar materials. From the available evidence in this case the churidar materials having some defects in it. The case of the complainant was un-challenged by the opposite party. So we have no reasons to dis-believe the case of the complainant. Hence we are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be allowed. In the result the complaint is allowed as follows. (1) We direct the opposite party to refund Rs.2629/- to the complainant and pay Rs.1000/- as compensation for inconveniences and Rs.750/- as costs of these proceedings. On getting the payment the complainant shall returned the churidars to the opposite party. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan Member Sd/- Sri.Santhosh Kesavanath.P. President Sd/- Smt.Bindhu M.Thomas Member. Sd/-
-3-
APPENDIX A1 is the copy of bill dt.6.11.2009. A2 is the copy of lawyer notice dt. 20.11.2009. A3 is the postal receipt dt. 20.11.2009. A4 is the postal A/D card.
By Orders,
Senior Superintendent.
Kgr/4 copies.
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member | | 
