West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

CC/12/58

Subhasis Bhattacharya - Complainant(s)

Versus

Zeiss, GKB Optolab Pvt. Ltd. and 3 others - Opp.Party(s)

22 Mar 2013

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Unit-I, Kolkata
http://confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/12/58
 
1. Subhasis Bhattacharya
26/1C, Sashibhusan Dey Street, Kolkata-700012.
Kolkata
WB
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Zeiss, GKB Optolab Pvt. Ltd. and 3 others
57/1, Park Street, Kolkata.
Kolkata
WB
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das PRESIDENT
 HON'ABLE MR. Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.

 

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.58/2012   

 

1)                   Subhasis Bhattacharya,

            26/1C, Sashibhusan Dey Street,

            Kolkata-12,  P.S. Muchipara.                                                                              ---------- Complainant

 

---Versus---

1)                   Zeiss,

            GKB Optolab Pvt. Ltd.

            57/1, Park Street, P.S. Park Street.

 

2)       Koyal Banerjee,

            Zeiss,

            GKB Optolab Pvt. Ltd.

            57/1, Park Street, P.S. Park Street.

 

3)       Ghazai Amini (Optometrist),

GKB Optolab Pvt. Ltd.

C/o. L.V. Prasad Eye Institute,

V. Prasad Marg, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034.

 

4)       Dr. Mukesh Taneja (Optometrist), DNB,

L.V. Prasad Eye Institute,

V. Prasad Marg, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034.                                  ---------- Opposite Parties.

 

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                                                                

Order No.   11    Dated  22-03-2013.

 

            The case of the complainant in short is that complainant had been to Hyderabad to get his eyes examined by doctors at L.V. Eye Institute, Hyderabad on 26.2.10 at Special Clinic. After completion of eye examination, the complainant asked the attending doctor for the prescription and the attending doctor Mukesh Taneja told him to go to GKB Opto Lab Pvt. Ltd. situated on the ground floor of L.V. Prasad Eye Institute building, Hyderabad to collect prescription and to consult with the optician regarding choice of lens whether progressive or bifocal whichever lens suits the complainant. Complainant went to GKB Opto Lab Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad according to the direction of the doctor Taneja and after a detailed discussion touching upon all aspects involved in this regard, the attending opticians at GKB Opto Lab Pvt. Ltd. suggested complainant to place an order for progressive lens, since as he opined that only such lens would suit him best and complainant shall have very clear vision if he uses such lens.

            The complainant placed an order for progressive lens worth of Rs.12,490/- as the complainant has been suffering from shortsightedness and he has low vision in both of his eyes. The attending opticians at GKB Hyderabad also told the complainant that cost of the frame is Rs.1000/- and cost of the lens is Rs.11,490/-.

            The complainant made an instant payment of Rs.2000/- to GKB Opto Lab Pvt. Ltd. Hyderabad as an advance amount as the complainant was not in a position to pay more and the attending optometrist told the complainant that the complainant could take deliver of the spectacles from their branch office situated at 57/1, Park Street, Kolkata-16 by paying rest of the amount.

            On 17.3.10 the complainant took delivery of the spectacles, which was said to be progressive lens on payment of rest of the amount of Rs.10,490/- in cash on the spot at Zaiss Showroom at  57/1, Park Street, Kolkata vide invoice no.930322010795 dt.17.3.10. The spectacle was found to be defective and did not satisfy complainant’s  need at all, since the near vision with the spectacles on was blurred and the complainant was unable to read, write or to see near objects.

            Complainant reported o.ps. office at Park Street branch about his inconvenience and the staff over there asked the complainant to deposit the spectacles with an assurance that the spectacles would be sent back to Hyderabad for necessary repair work and then on receipt of the same the complainant would be delivered his spectacles.

            After a gap of five months the complainant was told by the staff of the Park Street Branch that complainant would delivered a bifocal lens at an identical cost of Rs.12,490/- and complainant was also told that they have not replaced the frame of earlier spectacles (progressive lens) worth Rs.1000/-.

            The optician did not think it necessary to ask the complainant for his consent before making the spectacles with bifocal lens worth Rs.12,490/-.

            The complainant has left no stone unturned to settle the dispute, but o.ps. did not pay any heed to the complainant’s request. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

            O.ps. did not contest this case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against them.

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainant had been to Hyderabad to get his eyes examined by doctors at L.V. Eye Institute, Hyderabad on 26.2.10 at Special Clinic. After completion of eye examination, the complain ant asked the attending doctor for the prescription and the attending doctor Mukesh Taneja told him to go to GKB Opto Lab Pvt. Ltd. situated on the ground floor of L.V. Prasad Eye Institute building, Hyderabad to collect prescription and to consult with the optician regarding choice of lens whether progressive or bifocal whichever lens suits the complainant.

            Further we find from the record that complainant placed an order for progressive lens worth Rs.12,490/- as the complainant has been suffering from shortsightedness and he has low vision in both of his eyes. The attending opticians at GKB Hyderabad also told the complainant that cost of the frame is Rs.1000/- and cost of the lens is Rs.11,490/- and as we find from the record that on 17.3.10 the complainant took delivery of the spectacles, which was said to be progressive lens on payment of rest of the amount of Rs.10,490/- in cash.

            In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we hold that o.ps. had deficiency in service being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the case is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to refund the entire cost of Rs.12,490/- (Rupees twelve thousand four hundred ninety) only to the complainant and are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Complainant is at liberty to file execution case before this Forum in case of non-execution of the aforesaid order in its entirety within the stipulated period under the provision of COPRA, 1986.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. Sankar Nath Das]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'ABLE MR. Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri]
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.