BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 21^st DAY OF MAY 2024

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

The complaint filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant seeking direction towards OP for the following reliefs:-

A total sum of Rs.6,35,880/-.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

The complainant is working as the Manager at Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). He and his wife Smt. Noorain both decided to purchase the King size bed and visited the OPs store located at Arikere, Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru on 24.05.2023. The OPs furniture brand namely “Royal Oak” a huge brand name, located at all over the country having many stores. The complainant believing that the Royal Oak is one of the fines and authenticated Brand for purchasing the furniture which has acquired a huge brand and widely recognized as a reputed brand of furniture, looking at their wide publicity and advertisement of the brand, visited the store to buy a King size wooden cot. The sales team of the OPs suggested to purchase the Mourya Wooden King size cot and assured the complainant that the product is very good without any remarks and damages and it will be very comfortable for the sound sleep without any discomfort and somehow convinced the complainant to purchase the product with the false assurances made by the sales person with regard to the said product and finally the complainant and his wife selected the Mourya Wooden King size cot to purchase.

3. The complainant and his wife purchased the wooden cot and the cost of the same is Rs.43,000/-, at the time of purchase the sales team of the OPs has given false assurances that if the selected item is having any damage or malfunctioning the same shall be immediately looked into but not revealed that there is no replacement policy in the OPs retail outlet. The OPs is manufacturing very poor quality products and selling in the market without the replacement policy by keeping the customers in dark and has created a very big image in the present market that the furniture of the OP is having a very good quality.

4. The OPs sales team is duty bound to explain its customers (complainant who is also one of its customers) about the warranty and the replacement policy etc. prior to selling of the any of their furniture. Until the product is sold, the sale persons kept silent and after receiving the money from the complainant and after delivering the poor quality and defective wooden cot, they have shown utter negligence and ignored the requests of the complainant by not responding to the grievances of the complainant. The OPs sales team utterly failed to enlighten the complainant regarding the terms of purchase, product details and fitting, performance and also about the replacement, return and refund policies. The complainant was kept in dark without providing any details about the product, its replacement and refund policy in case of any damage or malfunctioning.

5. The complainant purchased the above said product/furniture from store and the same was delivered to his residential address on 29.05.2023 and the OP No.2 has sent the Technician to assemble and fix the product. Upon installation of the said wooden king size bed, the complainant has realized that the product is defective and the same had issued with its poor performance and malfunctioning such as making creaky noise all over night and the complainant is not able to sleep properly whole night. Due to the continuous creaky noise the complainant and his wife had a very bad experience of sleep and it is causing lot of disturbance and discomfort to the complainant and the said furniture has almost occupied a full room space and the complainant and his wife both are staying in a flat of two bed room house apart from the bed room, there is no other extra room to keep this King Size cot. The product purchased by the complainant is of no use. It is very disturbing and noisy. Moreover, the complainant’s wife is also a working women who is a KAS officer under training and her SAS Department exams were schedule on 09.06.2023 to 22.06.2023 and due to her sleepless night, she had migraine was not able to study and concentrate for her exams. This is not only affecting their sleep, but also impacting their health and daily routine. Moreover, the furniture is occupied the entire room and the complainant is not having any other place to shift the same and to substitute the said cot.

6. Upon installation of the said cot, it was confronted with the technician that the product delivered by the OP No.2 is a defective one, it has uneven surface and frame is of poor quality and the cot is noisy and making creaky noise like an old cot and the center legs of the cot not touching the floor. Realizing the same the complainant has approached the sales person over phone and informed about the defective product that has received and requested to fix the same. Disappointed and dissatisfied with the poor quality and the performance of the furniture and the difficulties he is facing with the product such as creaky noise and not comfortable with the sleep.

7. In spite of several requests to the sales persons to make arrangement either for the replacement or return and refund of the product, no positive response was given by the OP No.2 and their sale team. All the requests of the complainant have been ignored and neglected. The complainant had physically approached the Store Manager and complained about the malfunction of the product and the difficulties that the complainant is facing. Despite his requests to look into the issue the store manager has totally ignored the request of the complainant and has made no arrangements either to replace the product or to refund the same. The complainant has approached the sales persons of the OP No.2 on several times through phone calls, E-mails etc. The complainant when visited the Store manager and requested to make arrangement or return the product and to refund the amount, to the utter shock of the complainant, the sales person informed the complainant that there was no replacement policy in the store of OP for the damaged, defective product and the said information made the complainant more panic and caused severe mental agony to him. In fact, it is the duty of the sales persons and the store to make available to its customer whoever visit to purchase any products to inform the customers about the product details, replacement policy, warranty and fixation, return policy and refund policy.

8. After knowing the shocking information that there is not return policy in case of the product is defective, the complainant has approached Store Manger of the OP No.2 and explained his grievance to the Store Manager and requested to return the product and refund the amount, and the Store Manager of the OP No.2 has also informed the complaint that there is no replacement policy even if the product is totally damaged, this clearly shows that the OP No.1 and 2 how unethically making money by opting such a business tactics to by not revealing about their replacement and refund policy and by not responding to their customers grievances. This clearly establishes that the OP deliberately delivered the defective and damaged product to the complainant and now not ready to refund his money and created the forceful circumstances to keep the product with them. Many of the customers who have been made victims of the OP No.1 and 2 and who have purchased the furniture from the various stores of the OP No.1 has given their feedback and given their review about their bad/bitter experiences they had with the OP No.1 and its stores.

9. The OP No.1 & 2 are highly irresponsible and had shown utter negligent towards the complainant and his grievance and had unattended. Despite his several approaches and repeated requests to replace the product or to refund the money neither the sales person nor the store manager have given a positive response, moreover the store manager has informed that “even the product is fully damaged also there would be no replacement and no refund” this clearly amount to cheating and negligent. The complainant further submits that, there is no indication or board at the store for the customers to show that there would be no replacement or refund policy. Once the payment was done from the complainant, the bill was generated. After sale process was completed, they have sent the online invoice to the whatsapp number 9739449925 of the complainant wherein in the said invoice it is reflected that there is no replacement policy. Due to the OPs act of conduct, the complainant has to suffer and he has undergone mental agony and the situation created by the OP No.1 & 2 has traumatized the complainant. Hence the complainant is entitled to file a consumer complaint being the customer of the OP No.1&2. Under these circumstances the complainant had issued the legal notice to the OP No.1&2. Despite the issuance of the said legal notices no response from the OP NO.1&2. Hence this complaint by the complainant.

10. On issue of notice to the OPs, the OP No.2 fail to appear before this commission. Hence OP No.2 is placed Ex-parte. OP NO.1 appeared in the later stage, version has not filed since lapse of 45 days. OP No.1filed its written arguments. The complainant filed affidavit evidence along with 8 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. The complainant submits written arguments and heard complainant counsel and we perused the materials on record.

11. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OPs?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

12.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:-Affirmative.

Point No.2:-Partly Affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

13. Point No.1&2:-These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

14. On perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant, Ex.P.1 is an invoice copy issued by the OPs to the complainant dated 24.05.2023 for an amount of Rs.43,000/-, which clearly shows that the complainant had purchased Mourya wooden king size bed without storage from the OPs for a total amount of Rs.43,000/-. Ex.P.2 are the photos of the bed showing the damages and other manufacturing defect of the bed. Ex.P.3 & 4 are the copy of mail by the complainant to the OPs, complaining about the defective cot purchased by the complainant and requesting for a refund or return. Ex.P.5 & 6 are the legal notices issued to the OPs by the complainant through his counsel.

15. Looking into the documents submitted by the complainant, it is true that the complainant has purchased a king size cot from OPs and the said cot has manufacturing defect, hence the complainant has approached the OPs several times for replacement or refund of the amount paid by the complainant for the said cot. The OPs have failed to replace or refund. The complainant has purchased the cot on 24.05.2023 and has raised his complaint immediately on installation of the cot, for which the OPs fails to respond.

U/s 84 of C.P.A liability of the product manufacturer – (I) A product manufacturer shall be liable in product liability action, if :

a) The product contains a manufacturing defect or

b) the product is defective in design; or

c) there is a deviation from manufacturing specifications; or

d) the product does not conform to the express warranty; or

e) the product fails to contain adequate instruction of correct usage to prevent any harm or any warning regarding improper or incorrect usage.

The OPs havedelivered a defective product to the complainant and also fails to inform the consumer i.e. the complainant about the product details, warranty, return policy etc. Under section 84 of CPA, the OP is liable of the defective product manufacturing.

U/s 85 – liability of product service provider:- a product service shall be liable to a product liability action, if –

a) The service provided by him was faulty or imperfect of deficient or inadequate in quality, nature or manner of performance which is required to be provided by or under any law for the time being in force, or pursuant to any contract or otherwise; or

b) there was an act of omission or commission or negligence or conscious with holding any information which caused harm; or

c) the service provider did not issue adequate instruction or warnings to prevent any harm; or

d) the service did not conform to express warranty or terms and conditions of the contract.

16. The complainant has approached the OP immediately on delivery and installation of the cot booked by him, as the cot was defective and the complainant was not happy by the product delivered to him, and was also facing discomfort to sleep on it as it was noisy and uncomfortable. The complainant raised the complaint with OP regarding the same and requested for replacement or refund of the said product, but the OP fail to give proper service to the complainant though the complainant expressed his discomfort immediately on the delivery of the cot. Looking into the above facts, we see that the complainant has faced discomfort, and the OP has not only supplied a product with a manufacturing defect, which is not in correct usage but has also shown negligence and deficiency in service towards the complainant. Hence the OP is liable to refund an amount of Rs.43,000/- to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation charges. Hence we answer Point NO.1&2 accordingly.

17. Point No.3:-In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, is hereby allowed in part.
2. OPs No.1&2 are jointly and severally liable to refund Rs.43,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization.
3. OPs shall also pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards deficiency in service and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation charges.
4. OPs shall comply this order within 45 days from the date of order, failing which, shall have to pay interest at the rate of 10% p.a. on the entire Award amount till realization.
5. Furnish the copies of the order and return the extra copies of pleadings and documents to the parties, with no cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 21st day of May 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL