SRI. SAJEESH.K.P    : MEMBER

    The complainant has  filed this complaint  under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019,  seeking direction against the  OP to  provide the wedding album and video by collecting  the balance amount  and also pay  Rs.25000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- cost of litigation to the complainant.

Complaint in brief :-

The complainant entrusted the wedding photo with video package of marriage dated 8^th and 9^th of March 2022 for total amount of Rs.60,000/- with OP and paid Rs.45,000/- in advance and promised to pay balance  on the fulfillment of  contract.  On 30/3/2022 complainant  approached the OP for the videos and wedding album with  balance amount but  the OP demanded extra Rs.75000/- from the  complainant.  The OP given a raw file of photos and 15 hours long video without editing to the complainant.  Hence the complainant again approached with  balance payment of Rs.5900/- to get the photos and videos as per the agreement but the  failed to provide the same and hence this complaint.

           After filing the complaint, commission sent notice  to OP. OP entered appearance before the commission and filed their version accordingly.

Version of  OP in brief:

    The  OP denies the entire allegations except those specifically admitted. The OP admits the date of work, entrustment of photography work of marriage and the conditions specified in the quotation but denied the averments regarding  the payment.  The OP contended that he has sent 2 e mails with photos to select which  the complainant did not turn up and the OP again sent 2 e-mails for photo selection on March 10^th and 18^th August 2022.  Even after the OP’s repeated communication of whatsapp  Message and phone calls, complainant never responded .  On 8^th June2023, complainant sent a voice note through whatsapp that he needed  a  clip and  unedited video and on 9^th June 2023 we shall provide all data by paying  50% of balance amount.  The complainant bought 256 GB pen drive and paid Rs.7500+1600/- for pen drive and the OP couriered the data through professional  courier on 12^th  June 2023 and also provided an edited wedding Reel video too.   The OP provided proper service and there is no deficiency in service and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

        Due to the rival contentions raised by the OPs to the litigation, the commission decided to cast the issues  accordingly.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the side of  OPs?
2. Whether there is any  compensation  &  cost to the complainant?

       In order to answer the issues, the commission called evidence from both parties. The  complainant produced documents which is marked as Exts.A1 & A2.   Ext.A1 is the online  assignment, Et.A2 is the copy of  google pay payment receipt (3 in Nos).  The complainant adduced evidence through proof affidavit and examined as PW1.  Complainant was  not  cross examined  by OP.  From the side of OP has no oral as well as documentary evidence.

     Let us  have a clear glance into the  evidences brought before the commission. On the perusal of Ext.A1, which was sent by OP to complainant  the terms and conditions of the assignment of wedding  and the consideration fixed, is apparent and goes in tune with complaint.  As the OP entered appearance and filed version and denied certain averments made by complainant  but no  supporting evidence produced to substantiate their  claim like  the complainant never responded to the OP properly and kept silent for a long time even after the repeated enquiries made by the OP regarding the photos and videos.  According to Ext.A2, it is clear that an amount of Rs.54,100/- was debited from the account of Praseetha, which was already stated in the complaint that the amount will be  deducted  from the account of  aforesaid person.  From the Ext.A2 it is seen that the  transactions made on various date like 1/3/22,8/3/22,9/3/22 respectively.  Hence , the contention of OP regarding that the complainant never responded to the enquiries related to video and photos and also the complainant never attempted to collect the  album and photos will not lie .  Moreover, complainant’s prayed to get the videos and photos and the complainant is  also ready and  willing to  pay the balance amount. Therefore, the commission came into a conclusion that the OP is liable for the deficiency in service and  thereby the OP is directed to give photos and videos as per the specification in Ext.A1 and receive the balance amount.  In default the OP is directed to pay Rs.54,100/- which was received from the complainant towards the payment of videos and photos.

           In the result complaint is allowed in part, the  opposite party is  directed to provide wedding album and videos as per the specifications agreed by the complainant and  opposite party in Ext.A1 and receive the balance  payment (Rs.5,900/-)from the complainant and also  pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation  for mental agony and  Rs.5,000/- as  cost of litigation to the complainant  within 30 days of receipt of this order.  In default the opposite party is liable to  pay Rs.54,100/- which was received from the complainant towards the payment of videos and photos. Failing which complainant is at liberty to file execution application against  the  opposite party as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1-Online assignment

A2- Online payment(3 in Nos)

PW1-Ankush -complainant.

Sd/                                                   Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR