Karnataka

Kolar

CC/95/2023

Sri.Thanasri.K.S - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Royal Oak in Corporation Pvt LTd - Opp.Party(s)

29 Aug 2023

ORDER

Date of Filing: 29/04/2023

Date of Order: 29/08/2023

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, OLD D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR – 563 101.

 

Dated:29^th DAY OF AUGUST 2023

SRI. SYED ANSER KALEEM, B.Sc., B.Ed., LL.B., …… PRESIDENT

SMT. SAVITHA AIRANI, B.A.L., LL.M., …..LADY MEMBER

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO:95/2023

Sri. Thanusri. K.S,

W/o C. Kumar,

Aged about 40 years,

R/at. Sri. Lakshmi Nilaya,

1^st Cross, 14^th Ward,

Jayanagara,

Near Karnataka Bank ATM,

Kolar – 563101.

(Rep. by Sri. G.R. Ramachandra , Advocate)     ….  Complainant.

 

                                                                                                                - V/s –

1. The Royaloak Incorporation

Pvt. Ltd., Kondenahalli Village,

Channarayapatna Hobli,

Devanahalli Taluk,

Bengaluru Rural District.

Represented by its proprietor.

 

2. Rayaloak Furniture Store,

Avalahalli (OMR),

Old Madras Road,

Near Brigade,

Bengaluru.

    (Exparte)                                                       ….Opposite Parties.                                      

 

-: ORDER:-

BY SRI. SYED ANSER KALEEM, PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the Opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and pray for direction to refund the amount of Rs.69,399/- along with the interest @18%, Per month and Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation and for mental agony,  such other relief as this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit in the ends of Justice.

 

2. The Brief facts of the complainant is that, the complainant submits that she had purchased the following articls show below from the Op i.e. Royal Oak Furniture’s  for a total sum of Rs.69,399/- on 21.07.222 for which the complainant availed loan from Bajaj Finance and the complainant is paying EMI in full.

 

			QTY
		BD202010016(King Size Cot
		Mt401-32x75 (Single Bed
		MTP21 (Pillows Memory Foam)
		MT501-72x78 (King size matters Memory Foam)

 

3. Further stated that, the complainant after using the king size cot the complainant found defect in it and it was not fit to use and while using the cot it was shaking.  That the complainant intimated to the Ops and complained about the defect of cot, and then the Ops registered the complaint in I.D. No.R/PL26582 on 28.07.2022 and informed to the complainant that the technician will visit to her place.  Despite the complaint, the technician did not come to visit to the complainant spot and thereby many e-mails were got exchanged and Ops asked to share images and videos, that was also sent by the complainant, in spite of it the Ops have not responded properly.  Hence this complaint.

 

 

4. On issuance of notice and despite service of notice, Ops failed to appear before this Commission in order to answer the claim of the complainant, consequently Ops are placed Exparte.
5. In order to prove the case of the complainant and the complainant filed her affidavit evidence and also filed supporting documents.
6. On the basis of the pleadings averred in the complaint and the evidence placed on record, the following points will do arise for our consideration.

 

1. Whether the complainant proves that Ops is deficient in his service?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as sought in the complaint?

3.  What Order?

 

 

7. Heard the arguments of the complainant and perused the evidence placed on record.  Our findings to the above points are as follows.

 

 

POINT NO. (1)&(2):-  In the affirmative.

POINT NO. (3):-        As per the final order

                                 for the following.

 

REASONS

8. POINT No (1) & (2):- These 2 points are interlinked to each other and hence taken up together for common discussion in order to avoid repetition of discussion of facts and for the sake of convenience.

 

9. The specific allegation of the complainant is that, she had purchased the king size cot and mattress (bed) along with memory form and pillows and single bed quir from the OP by paying an amount of Rs.69,399/- and thereafter complainant by using the cot and bed noticed the irregular fitting of the cot and it making noise and thereby she suffered not having good sleep.  Further it is stated that, though she intimated through e-mails though Ops promise to send technician to rectify the improper installation of the cot which was shaking, but the OPs failed to send any technician or OPs failed to come forward to take back the cot and the mattress by refunding the amount.

 

10. In order to prove the case of the complainant and the complainant filed her affidavit evidence along with the copies of purchased bills (e-way bill) and e-mail correspondence.  However, OPs failed to appear before this Commission to resist the claim of the complainant and consequently OPs placed exparte.

 

11. On perusal of the affidavit evidence it discloses that complainant retreated all the facts averred in this complaint.  Further on perusal of e-way bill is evident that that the complainant was purchased the king size cot and mattresses, 2 pillows with single bed quir by paying an total amount of Rs.69,399/- .  It is note worthy to mention that, the only allegation of the complainant is that, due to improper fitting of the cot while sleeping it was shaking and thereby she suffered back pain and visited the hospital but not alleged anything about the single bed quir matters?  On perusal of the e-mail correspondence it is evident that complainant forward all her grievances regarding the improper fitting of the cot and mattresses are alleged in the complaint but all the allegations made by the complainant remained unchallenged under the circumstances we cannot disbelieve the evidence placed on record.  Further OP being the service provider to his customer and not come forwarding to restore the cot and the mattresses into proper order it amounts to deficiency in service for having suffered. Further complainant cannot use the defective improver fittings to suffer further and when Op failed to correct, hence the complainant is entitled for the refund of the amount paid to the purchase of the said cot and the mattresses, 2 pillows and single bed quir.  Hence we deem it just and proper that the OPs is liable to pay a sum of Rs.69,399/- by receiving back all the purchased items from the complainant at their own cost.  Accordingly we answered the Point No.(1) & (2) in the affirmative.

 

12. Point No. (3):- On the basis of the answering the points No (1) and (2) and the reasons assigned thereon, we proceed to pass the following.

     ORDER

1)  Complaint is allowed in part with cost.

2)  OP Royal Oak represented by its proprietor/ Manager is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.69,399/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which OP is directed to pay interest @ 6.5% pa. on the above amount till its realization.

3) OP is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to its cost of the proceedings.

4)  OP is directed to submit compliance report within 45 days.

5) send a copy of this order to all the parties to the proceedings at free of cost.

     (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected    and then pronounced by us on this 29^th DAY OF AUGUST 2023)

 

 

 

               LADY MEMBER                      PRESIDENT