DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 121/2014
D.No.__________________ Date: ___________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ms. SHALINI RASTOGI,
W/o LATE SH. ASHIT RASTOGI,
R/o B-1/504, VARUN APARTMENT,
SEC.-9, ROHINI, DELHI.
ALSO AT: F-3, 225, 2nd FLOOR,
SEC.-16, ROHINI, DELHI. … COMPLAINANT
Versus
M/s VIBES HEALTHCARE LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR/MANAGER/
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE,
GD-23, PITAM PURA,
NEAR PITAM PURA METRO STATION,
DELHI. … OPPOSITE PARTY
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 24.01.2014
Date of decision:27.05.2020
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OP under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 therebyalleging that OP is running a Beauty Parlour under the name & style of M/s
CC No. 121/2014 Page 1 of 6
Vibes Healthcare Ltd. which is a unit of Alankar Group, though, pursuant to the name of OP in the market, the complainant was seduced by its officials to take admission in the coaching cum training of Beautician of OP and in faith to ensure a way of some earning and also towards her personal interest, agreed for the same and as per instructions of officials of OP, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.40,000/- i.e. Rs.29,897/- plus cash in the parlour and OP issued receipts in this regard. After being admitted in the parlour of OP, the complainant faced very unexpected surprises and ignorant atmosphere as the products, machines, training objects and other materials used by the parlour was of very spurious quality and even some products were being used which were already expired. The complainant further alleged that the complainant objected for the same, as it could be very dangerous for the health, skin and other prospectus of using such expired products, then the officials of OP misbehaved with the complainant and threatened the complainant that she will be turned out of parlour without completing the coaching and the complainant felt that it is not safe anymore to learn from the said parlour of OP, as the guidance/coaching given by the officials of OP could not be treated in practical way and when the complainant asked OP for the refund of aforesaid deposit of Rs.40,000/-, then the officials told that the said amount is not refundable and at the time of depositing the said amount, the complainant was assured by the officials of
CC No. 121/2014 Page 2 of 6
OP that the said amount will be refunded to the complainant, in case the coaching/training is not completed. The complainant further alleged that OP also misbehaved with the complainant without caring that she is a lady but the attitude, behaviour, tone and words selected/used by the officials of OP are too harassing, torturing, defamatory and causing mental tension and agony to the complainant. The complainant further alleged that the complainant has suffered a loss and there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OP to pay the amount of Rs.40,000/- alongwith appropriate interest as well as compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental pain, agony and has also sought Rs.11,000/- towards cost of litigation.
3. OP has been contesting the case and filed reply and submitted that the officials of OP did not seduce the complainant to take admission in OP’s establishment and further submitted that the complainant visited OP’s centre at Pitam Pura, Delhi in the month of June-2011 and inquired about the Beautician Training Course and OP assigned 2 of its employees namely Ms. Anu and Ms. Harpreet who explained the details and requirements for applying to the training program. OP further submitted that the complainant did not deposit the sum of Rs.40,000/- i.e. Rs.29,897/- plus cash and submitted that the complainant after enrolling herself for the
CC No. 121/2014 Page 3 of 6
course made payment of Rs.14,946/- and Rs.4,951/- on 01.06.2011. On 14.06.2011, the complainant again made a payment of Rs.10,000/- and a receipt was issued to her by OP bearing receipt no. 17657 and the total amount received from the complainant by OP is Rs.29,897/-. OP further submitted that the complainant undertook training at the beauty and health centre of OP and completed the course and a training completion certificate was issued to the complainant upon completion of the course. OP further submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation as the same is filed after expiry of period of two years from the date on which cause of action arose. OP further submitted that the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
4. The complainant filed reply to the reply of OP and denied the contentions of OP which has been taken in the reply of OP.
5. In order to prove her case, the complainant filed her affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant has also placed on record copies of receipts no. PKG/0110/11-12/012054 dated 14.06.2011 of Rs.10,000/- and receipt of Rs.14,961/- dated 01.06.2011 issued by OP and copy of legal notice dated 29.11.2013 sent by the complainant through her Counsel to OP by speed post. The complainant also filed written arguments.
6. On the other hand, Ms. Arti Kohli, Vice President of OP filed her
CC No. 121/2014 Page 4 of 6
affidavit in evidence which is as per line of defence taken by OP in its reply. OP has filed copy of certificate of completion given to the complainant to the effect that the complainant has successfully completed the certificate course in Skin (Beauty) during the period from June 2011 to August 2011. OP has also filed written arguments.
7. This forum has considered the case of the complainant and OP in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the parties.The case of the complainant has not remainedconsistent and there is doubt in the case of the complainant.
8. We have considered the submissions of the complainant in the light of pleadings, evidence and documents proved on record. The complainant in her pleadings as well as in her evidence has not clearly and specifically stated as to on what dates she attended the training course with OP. This point has become important in the light of the fact that the complainant firstly deposited the amount with OP on 01.06.2011 and subsequently the complainant deposited the amount with OP on 14.06.2011. If OP was not giving proper training to the complainant, she would not have deposited the amount on second occasion. Moreover, it is not clarified and explained by the complainant as to why she remained silent for a period of more than two years. It also shows that there is no merits in the case of the complainant and is liable to be dismissed being devoid of merits.
CC No. 121/2014 Page 5 of 6
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 27th day of May, 2020.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 121/2014 Page 6 of 6
UPLOADED BY:SATYENDRA JEET
