Date of Filing:16.10.2009<br /> Date of Order:22.03.2010<br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 22nd DAY OF MARCH 2010<br /> PRESENT<br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2411 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> 01. K.Anitha Shivakumar,<br /> W/o Shivakumar<br /> Aged about 38 yrs,<br /> R/at No.87, Taralabalu Enclave,<br /> Near Yelahanka Circle,<br /> B.B.Road, Bangalore – 64.<br /> <br /> 02. Sri.Hanamanal. B.M.<br /> S/o M.B.Hanamanal,<br /> Aged about 75 yrs,<br /> R/at Makaranda, 4th Main,<br /> Gandhinagar, Dharwad – <br /> Complainant<br /> V/S<br /> VALMIKI FURNISHING & FURNITURE<br /> No.10, 1st Main Road,<br /> Near Canara Bank, Yelahank New Town<br /> Bangalore – 64, Repted by its proprietor<br /> Mr.Manjunatha.<br /> Opposite Party <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> 2. The facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a chair for Rs.4,000/- from the Opposite Party. The 2nd complainant is a senior citizen. The Opposite Party has assured that the chair is a good quality. But to the utter shock and surprise that the representations of the Opposite Party turned out to be unfair and fraudulent as the said new rocking chair break down in to pieces within two months and the 2nd complainant sustained injuries due to fall. The complainant issued written notice for replacement of the chair or refund of the amount including transportation charges from Dharawad to Bangalore. The Opposite Party refunded actual costs of the chair i.e., Rs.4,000/- and sought some time to pay transportation charges and compensation for mental agony. The complainant several time demanded the Opposite Party to settle the matter. The complainant issued another notice. He personally visited the Opposite Party once again, the Opposite Party did not comply the request and demand. The Opposite Party instead of making good of the loss, he is trying to blame others. Hence, the complainant has prayed for direction to Opposite Party to pay Rs.1,000/- towards transportation charges and for compensation of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and physical discomforts. <br /> 3. The opposite party has filed defence version stating that, admitting that the complainant has purchased the chair for Rs.4,000/. After notice for replacement of the chair or refund of the amount, the Opposite Party informed the complainant to bring the chair to get the refund in order to maintain good gesture towards the customers. The Opposite Party is only a dealer and he is not responsible for whatsoever happened to the item. The manufacturer who is responsible for the same. The Opposite Party has not violated the conditions of sale warranty. The Opposite Party is not entitled to refund Rs.25,000/- plus Rs.1,000/- transportation charges as claimed by the complainant. Hence, the Opposite Party requested to dismiss the complaint. <br /> 4. In support of the complaint, affidavits filed by both parties. Arguments are heard. <br /> 5. The points for consideration are:- <br /> <br /> 1) Whether the Opposite Parties can be directed to pay transportation charges of Rs.1,000/-?<br /> <br /> 2) Whether the complainant entitled for compensation for mental agony?<br /> <br /> <br /> 6. My finds are:- <br /> Point No(1) : In the Affirmative<br /> Point No(2) : In the Negative<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> Point Nos. 1 to 2:- <br /> 7. The complainant has produced cash bill of Opposite Party dated 17/10/2007. This is for Rs.4,000/-. The complainant has produced transportation charges bill of VRL. This is for Rs.203/-. The Opposite Party has produced some photos to show that some injuries to leg happened to the complainant No.2. The complainant has produced copies of letters and copies of invoice etc., and postal acknowledgment. As regards the purchase of chair from the Opposite Party for Rs.4,000/- is admitted. It is also admitted fact that the Opposite Party refunded Rs.4,000/- - the costs of the chair to the complainant. The only dispute between the parties is with regard to paying of transportation charges. It is true that the complainant is a native of Dharwad and he has purchased the chair from Bangalore and after two months of the purchase, the chair break down, the complainant No.2 fell down and sustained some injuries. Therefore the complainant requested for replacement of chair or refund of the amount. Accordingly the Opposite Party refunded the full cost of the chair. The complainant demanded for transportation charges and compensation. The Opposite Party postponed to pay transportation charges for one or the other reason. Therefore ultimately the complainant was forced to file the complaint. The complainant has produced VRL receipt to show that the chair was transported from Dharwad to Bangalore. The complainant naturally might have spent amount for taking chair to Bangalore from Dharwad. When the chair supplied is not of good quality and the said chair break down within two months form the date of purchase. Therefore, naturally the complainant is right in demanding refund of the amount with transportation charges. The Opposite Party in order to maintain good relation with the customers has refunded the amount, but has refused to pay the transportation charges and compensation. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just fair and reasonable to direct the Opposite Party to pay Rs.500/- as transportation charges of the chair to the complainant. The complainant prayed for compensation of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and physical discomfort. As regards this aspect is concerned, there is absolutely no evidence or any proof to show that the complainants have suffered mental agony and inconvenience. This is a small matter pertains to one chair and the chair found to be not worth or sub standard one and it was given back to the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party has refunded the full cost of the chair. Therefore, almost all the matter has been settled, the only point to be considered is transportation charges for bringing the chair from Dharwad to Bangalore. This is not a case to grant compensation to the complainant. The ends of justice will be met in awarding Rs.500/- as transportation charges. The complainant is also entitled to costs of the present litigation. Since he has paid requisite court fee and also engaged Advocate and spent amount for this proceedings. Therefore, it would be just fair and reasonable to grant Rs.1,000/- as costs of the present litigation. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> 1) The complaint is ALLOWED.<br /> 2) The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.500/- as transportation charges to the complainant.<br /> 3) The Opposite Party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as costs of the present petition to the complainant. <br /> 4) The Opposite Party is directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of order <br /> 5) The Opposite Party is directed to send the amount as ordered to the complainant directly by way of cheque or D.D. with intimation to this Forum. <br /> 6) Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 7) Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 22nd DAY OF MARCH 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br />