3

and took the saree after satisfying herself she paid the printing charges of Rs. 350/-

and took the saree without any arguments. But surprisingly she issued legal

notice for which they sent reply to the said notice. The respondent stated that there

is no deficiency of service on the part of the respondent and they are not liable to pay

any compensation to the complainant.

4. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A4 were marked and no

documents were filed and marked on the side of the respondent.

5. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for

determination.

i. Whether the complainant is entitled to receive the cost of the saree

along with printing charges from the respondent?

ii. Whether there is any negligence and deficiency of service on the

part of the respondent?

iii. To what relief?

6. Point No. 1 & 2 Heard both sides and perused the records available

with the forum and the forum made the following order. The complainant purchased

one Pattu Saree worth of Rs. 1,000/- in the month of April 2008 with an intention to

wear the said saree in the function of her nearest relatives. Ex. A1 is Xerox copy of

saree bill dt. 21-4-2008 with an intention to print some design on the saree she

approached the respondent and she selected one Radha Krishna design and accepted

to pay Rs. 350/- towards printing charges. She handed over saree to the respondent

with a request to give the saree on or before 22-5-2008. She approached the

respondent on 22-5-2008 for delivery of the printing saree. She paid Rs. 350/-

towards printing charges and took the saree and after opening the saree she noticed

that Radha Krishna design was not printed on the saree instead of that they printed

some flowers which were not selected by the complainant. According to Ex. A1 the

respondent has issued bill stating that Radha Krishana design will be on pallu and

4

some rose flowers on the body of the saree. According to Ex. A2 the respondent

collected Rs. 350/- towards Radha Krishna design, when the complainant questioned

about the design the respondent gave evasive reply stating that she selected the

design Radha Krishna which does not mean that Radha Krishna design of good and

goddess. The complainant took saree and returned home and she was much worried

about wrong printing of design on her saree. She issued legal notice to the

respondent to give explanation for wrong printing of design. The respondent filed its

counter and stated that she is a regular customer to their printing shop. When the

complainant approached the respondent she selected one Radha Krishna design and

they accepted to print the same.

7. On 22-5-2008 the complainant paid Rs. 350/- and took the saree after

opening the saree she noticed that Radha Krishna design was not printed on the

saree. The respondent has printed another design which was not selected by the

complainant. The respondent denied and stated that the Radha Krishna design, does

not contain the god and goddess ideals but it is the name of the design. The counsel

for the respondent argued that any saree boarder will not contain with god and

goddess ideals and nobody will wear the same. By perusing Ex. A2 it is clear that the

Radha Krishna design has to came on the pallu of the saree but not on the boarder.

The respondent has committed mistake by not printing the design selected by the

customer. Ex. A3 is the legal notice issued by the complainant to the respondent and

Ex. A4 is the reply notice given by the respondent to the complainant. The

complainant has not produced the saree before the Forum for perusing, if she might

have produced the saree the Forum might have seen the saree and it is good for any

decision. For any business man it is his bounded duty to satisfy the customers.

Here the respondent has not satisfied the complainant i.e. the customer, so when

5

there is no customer satisfaction he has to reimburse the printing charges to the

complainant. Hence, the points are answered accordingly.

8. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the

respondent to pay Rs. 350/- (Rupees three hundred and fifty only) towards printing

charges and Rs. 250/- (Rupees Two hundred and fifty only) towards mental agony.

The respondent is directed to comply the order of the Hon’ble forum within 30 days

from the date of receipt of this order. The rest of the claim is dismissed.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by us in the open forum, this the 9

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant : NIL For Respondent : NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant : -

Ex. A1 X/c of bill issued by Sree Veerabhadra Swamy Textiles pvt. Ltd.,

dt. 21-4-2008.

Ex. A2 X/c of cash bill issued by respondent dt. 22-4-2008.

Ex. A3 X/c of legal notice issued by complainant’s advocate to the respondent,

dt. 11-6-2008

Ex. A4 X/c of reply notice from respondent’s advocate to complainant’s

advocate, dt. 12-7-2008.

Exhibits marked for Respondents: - ---- NIL -----

MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1) Sri C. Subba Reddy, Advocate,

2) Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate.

1) Copy was made ready on :

2) Copy was dispatched on :

3) Copy of delivered to parties :

B.V.P. - - -