Karnataka

Bangalore 1st & Rural Additional

CC/196/2019

Smt. Prathibha Lokesh Reddy, - Complainant(s)

Versus

VLCC Health Care Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. Maria Joseph

17 Nov 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE BENGALURU RURAL AND URBAN I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, I FLOOR, BMTC, B BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-27
 
Complaint Case No. CC/196/2019
( Date of Filing : 24 Jan 2019 )
 
1. Smt. Prathibha Lokesh Reddy,
W/o. Mr. Lokesh Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Residing at No.931, Vajreshwari Nilaya, Kacharakanahalli Near Amase Plaster St. Thomas Town Post, Bengaluru-560084.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. VLCC Health Care Limited
Having its office at No.4M-507,3rd Block, Kammanahalli Main Road, H.R.B.R Layout, Bengaluru-560043, Represented by its Authorised Signatory
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B., PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.A. L.L.B MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 17 Nov 2020
Final Order / Judgement

Date of Filing:24.01.2019

Date of Order:17.11.2020

 

BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE -  27.

Dated: 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020

PRESENT

SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, B.Sc., LL.B. Retd. Prl. District & Sessions Judge And PRESIDENT

MRS.SHARAVATHI S.M., B.A., LL.B., MEMBER

COMPLAINT NO.196/2019

COMPLAINANT         :

 

Smt. Prathibha Lokesh Reddy,

W/o. Mr.Lokesh Reddy,

Aged about 30 years

R/at No.931, Vajreshwari Nilaya,

Kacharakanahalli,

Near Amase Plaster,

St.Thomas Town Post,

Bengaluru 560 084.

 

(Rep. by Sri. Maria Joseph, Advocate)

 

 

Vs

OPPOSITE PARTIES: 

 

VLCC Health Care Limited,

Having its office at No.4M-507,

3rd Block, Kammanahalli Main Road,

HRBR Layout,

Bengaluru 560 043.

Rep. by its Authorised signatory.

 

(Exparte)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                      

 

ORDER

BY MRS.SHARAVATHI, MEMBER:

 

This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the Opposite Party (herein referred in short as Op) alleging the deficiency in service in not providing treatment for weight loss as agreed for which OP had received Rs.1,52,800/-(Rupees One Lakh Fifty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred Only) and for the refund of same and Rs.1,00,000/- as damages for the inconvenience and mental anguish and harassment caused and for litigation cost and other expenses and such other reliefs as this Commission deems fit.

  1.  

The Complainant approached OP for the treatment of weight loss as advertised by them. On 20.01.2017 complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and OP assured that the result of weight loss would be known in two or three sessions and will commence the treatment after consulting the doctors. Again OP informed that it would take more session for treatment and demanded her to pay Rs.52,800/- for treating in full and she paid the same on 17.02.2017. OP informed the complainant that she would receive phone call within one month to start the above treatment and at that time, OP gave additional details about the same. There was no proper response from OP and OP did not issue any appointment card. Complainant made phone calls and emails. OP did not initiate the process of Cool Sculpting, to reduce the weight as agreed. OP did not provide any details much less any service inspite of receiving the entire amount towards the Cool Sculpting treatment. It shows that OP never intended to provide any service, treatment and have fraudulently induced the complainant to make payment thereby practiced unfair trade.Hence the complaint.

  1.  

4. In order to substantiate her case, Complainant filed her affidavit evidence and produced documents. Heard the arguments. The following points have arise for our consideration;-

1) Whether the complainant has proved unfair trade practice by Opposite Party?

 

2)  Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

 

5.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT NO.1:            In the Affirmative

 

POINT NO.2:            Partly in the affirmative.

For the following.

 

                                            REASONS

POINT NO 1:-

6.   On perusing the complaint, evidence and the documents filed by the complainant it is clear that complainant opted the treatment to be given by OP for weight loss.  She has also paid Rs.1,00,000/- by way of issuing cheque which was honored and also Rs.52,800/- for the second time.  The documents produced clearly reveals the said payments.  The invoices are also produced wherein, OP has received the said amount.  It is also mentioned that the services shall be provided only to the extent of the amount received against the invoice value.  Money once deposited is not refundable.  However it can be adjusted towards any other packages after deduction of 20% of the amount towards unavailed services.

7.     When such being the case, it is the bounden duty of the OP to provide the treatment irrespective of the result of the treatment.  Not providing the treatment or not even commencing the treatment for which OP agreed by receiving the amount, amounts to deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice. It is a short coming on the part of the OP in not performing its duty owed to the complainant, due to which, complainant was made to suffer financially, physical and mentally.  Hence we answer Point No.1 in the affirmative.

8.     POINT NO 2:

In the result complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.1,52,800/- along with interest at 12% p.a., from the date of each payment and also Rs.10,000/- towards damages for undergoing  mental agony, physical strain and financial loss.  Further OP is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses and answer point No.2 partly in the affirmative and pass the following;

 

ORDER

  1. The Complaint is allowed on part with cost.
  2. OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,52,800 /- to the complainant along with interest 12% per annum from the date of respective payment to till the date of realization.
  3. Further OP hereby directed to pay sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of mental agony.
  4. The OP is hereby directed to comply the above order at within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
  5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.     

          Note:You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the same will be destroyed /weeded out.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this 17th  Day of NOVEMBER 2020)

 

 

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

ANNEXURES

  1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

CW-1

Smt. PRATHIBHA LOKESH REDDY - Complainant

 

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex P1: Duplicate copy of Invoice/payment receipt

Ex P2: Copy of the Bank statement of Axis Bank

Ex. P3: Copy of Bank statement of HDFC Bank

Ex P4: Broucher of OP No.3.

 

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B.,]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.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.