Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/12/2013

Mrs.Vasugi Ramanan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ush-Director-Maha Home service - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

13 Oct 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
CHENNAI (SOUTH)
 
Complaint Case No. CC/12/2013
 
1. Mrs.Vasugi Ramanan
T,Nagar, Chn -17.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Ush-Director-Maha Home service
T.Nagar, Chennai - 17.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  B.RAMALINGAM., MA., ML., PRESIDENT
  Dr.Paul Rajasekaran.,M.A.,D.MIN,HRDI,AIII,BCS MEMBER
  K.AMALA., M.A., L.L.B., MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

                                                                          Date of Complaint  : 07.01.2013

                                                                 Date of Order           :13.10.2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT :    THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L.,                  :  PRESIDENT                     

                     TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                :  MEMBER – I

                     DR.T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

                                                     

C.C.No. 12 / 2013

THIS  TUESDAY  13th  DAY OF  OCOTBER 2015

 

Mrs. Vasugi Ramanan

No.24, Bagavantham Street,

T.Nagar,

Chennai – 17.                                                    .. Complainant.

                                                         - Vs-

Mrs. Usha-Director – Maha Home Service,

14/34, Dhamodaran Street,

T.Nagar,

Chennai – 17.                                                       .. Opposite party.  

 

.. Opposite party.

 

 

 

 

For the complainant                     :   Party in person    

For the opposite party                   :   Exparte   

 

           Complaint under section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to the opposite party  to refund a sum of Rs.6750/- paid by the complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs.400/- the cost of advertisement to find a new cook and Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.  

 

ORDER

THIRUMATHI.K.AMALA,   ::    MEMBER-I

Even after receipt of the notice, the opposite party did not file written version.  Hence, the opposite party was set exparte on 25.9.2014.    The complainant filed proof affidavit.  Exhibits A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the complainant.  

2.     Perused the complaint, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4  filed by the complainant  and proof affidavit and the entire C.C. records and considered the arguments of the complainant in person.  

3.     The complainant contents that she paid a sum of Rs.7,000/- on 13.4.2012 to the opposite party as service charges for the purpose of employing a female cook  on the monthly basis.   The opposite party assured that the service would be available to the complainant for six months.  On 14.4.2012 the opposite party sent one cook to the complainant’s residence who worked only for one day without receiving the wages of Rs.250/-.   But she did not turned up the very next day.   The complainant waited for two days and contacted the opposite party.  The opposite party assured the complainant to send another person for cooking.  Since the opposite party failed to send any cook the complainant went directly to the opposite party office and explained the difficulties.   Again the opposite party assured the complainant to send any cook within a week.   But the opposite party did not keep up her words.   Hence the complainant gave an advertisement in Mambalam times in the issue of April 21 to 27 making a payment of Rs.400/- to appoint a cook.  

4.     The complainant contents that she availed the service of the opposite party only for one day and hence she demanded the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.7,000/- after deducting Rs.250/- the amount due to the cook who worked for one day.   But the opposite party spoke un-parliamentary words and abused the complainant.   Hence the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite party which was unclaimed by the complainant.  Hence the complainant has filed the complaint for refund of the amount paid as service charges and compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony. 

5.     It is evidenced through Ex.A1 that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.7,000/- as service charges to the opposite party to employ a cook at her residence.   Since the said cook came to work only for one day and  did not turned up the very next day the complainant contacted the opposite party.   Since the opposite party failed to send any alternate cook as agreed by her the complainant employed another cook by giving advertisement in Mambalam Times in April 21 to 27 by paying sum of Rs.400/- which evidenced through Ex.A2. 

6.     Since the opposite party refused to refund the services charges when demanded by the complainant she caused legal notice to the opposite party which was unclaimed by her which is evidenced through Ex.A3 & Ex.A4.  

7.     Hence the contention of the complainant that after receiving a sum of Rs.7,000/- by the opposite party to employ a cook for a period of six months and when the cook worked only for one day failure on their part to send alternative cook as promised by her and failure to refund the said  amounts to deficiency of service is acceptable.   Further it is the duty of the opposite party to render the service to the complainant to their full satisfaction after receipt of the consideration.    Whereas here the opposite party sent the cook only for one day and failed to send alternative cook and also failed to refund the service charges paid by the complainant, even after personal demand and legal notice.   Hence the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service.    Further the contention of the complainant that she faced lot of difficulties to manage the situation without cook, for one week and as such she was put to physical hardship and mental agony is also acceptable. 

8.     Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.6750/- paid by the complainant after deducting one day wages of Rs.250/- for the cook.     The opposite party is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.   Since the compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant we are inclined to award just and reasonable compensation.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.6750/- (Rupees Six thousand seven hundred and fifty only) and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) as litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the compensation amount of (Rs.5,000/) shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order  passed till the date of realization. 

                Dictated directly by the Member-I to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 13th     day of  October   2015.

 

 

MEMBER-I                                        MEMBER-II                                           PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 13.4.2012  - Copy of receipt for payment

Ex.A2- 21-27.4.2012 - Copy of paper advertisement.

Ex.A3- 2.5.2012       - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A4-         -          - Copy of returned cover unclaimed dated 4.5.12, 5.5.12

                                & 7.5.2012.  

 

 

Opposite party’s side documents: -    .. Nil ..   (exparte)

 

 

 

MEMBER-I                                         MEMBER-II                                          PRESIDENT. 

 
 
[ B.RAMALINGAM., MA., ML.,]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Dr.Paul Rajasekaran.,M.A.,D.MIN,HRDI,AIII,BCS]
MEMBER
 
[ K.AMALA., M.A., L.L.B.,]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.