COMPLAINT NO. 1739 OF 2009

Ms.Babitha Shree M.R.,

Aged about 36 yrs,

Apt.311, Pent House,

Suguna Opal Apts.,

1st Main Chinnanna Layout,

Kavalbyrasandra Layout,

R.T.Nagar Post,

Bangalore – 560 032

…. Complainant.

V/s

Smart Furnitures,

#3, Infantry Road, Shivajinagar,

Bangalore – 560 001.

…. Opposite Party

-: ORDER:-

This complaint is for a direction to the Opposite Party to refund Rs.28,750/- paid for the Sofa-set, Teapoy and Dinning Table and to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards harassment, on the following grounds:-

The complainant along with her Mother purchased leather Sofa-set, Teapoy with Glass Top and four leather seater dinning table with Glass Top from the Opposite Party on 07/07/2009 and 14/07/2009. The order was placed with advance payment of Rs.5,000/- and delivery of the Sofa-set and Teapoy was assured within three days, but the same was delayed inordinately without any information. As there was no response to the few calls, the complainant again visited the showroom of the Opposite Party on 13/07/2009 to take delivery of the Sofa-set or to seek refund of the advance amount paid. The Opposite Party confirmed the arrival of the product from the factory and assured delivery on the same day. On that day the complainant decided to go for four seater dinning table of the value of Rs.12,500/-, paid Rs.6,000/- by cash and issued cheque dated 10/08/2009 for the balance amount of Rs.6,500/-. The Opposite Party assured to send receipts for the payments along with the driver. On 13/07/2009 between 9.30 & 10.30 p.m. the Sofa-set was delivered and the Opposite Party assured to deliver the Dinning Table and the Teapoy on the next day due to transport problem. They made payment of Rs.19,000/- and agreed to pay the balance on delivery of the Teapoy and dinning table which were delivered on 14/07/2009. On delivery of those items, the balance payment of Rs.4,000/- towards Teapoy was made and towards dinning table Rs.6,000/- was paid by cash and cheque dated 10/08/2009 was issued for the balance of Rs.6,500/-. However, the Opposite Party did not send the receipts towards all the payments. They also paid labour charges of Rs.350/- to deliver the products to 5th Floor as demanded by the delivery boys and driver. On 18/07/2009 they noticed that the exposed arch shaped sofa arms at the seating leather was tearing and the same was informed to the Opposite Party, who assured that his factory person shall take inspection of the same and it would be rectified at the residence itself. Since nobody turned-up, the complainant took the photographs on Mobile and visited the Showroom on 19/07/2009 for immediate clarification. The Opposite Party assured to attend to the complaint made, on 20/07/2009 by 12 noon. But nobody turned-up on 20/07/2009 at the given time. When the complainant contacted the Opposite Party at about 2.45 p.m. the Opposite Party told them that they are creating stories and tensions and their factory persons will run away on such tedious schedule and asked them to wait till 3.00 p.m. for the factory person to arrive and if not arrived, throw the products at his showroom. The factory person Mr.Akram arrived at 5.00 p.m. on 20/07/2009 inspected the Sofa-set and updated about time required for rectification to be done at his factory instead of hand stitching and would be delivered by two days time. The complainant asked factory person to get the guarantee of the product after rectification, but he did not agree to take the risk. They asked the factory person to take the product and talk to the Opposite Party for the product guarantee after rectification. He was to take the product on 21/07/2009 at 1.00 p.m. but he did not turn-up. The Opposite Party was not responding to any of the calls and when they called up the factory person he asked them to discuss with the Opposite Party as the product shall not be taken to the factory due to certificate issue. As no solution was found, the complainant approached Manjunath, S.P. of Commercial Street Police Station on 21/07/2009. The Opposite Party was called for clarification. Mr.Suhail, Sales Person arrived on behalf of the Opposite Party and he was directed to replace the leather product to wood Sofa by taking the leather product from the house on 23/07/2009 at 12 noon, but the Opposite Party or the Sales Representative failed to take back the product. The complainant again approached the police officer, but he asked the complainant to approach Consumer Forum. The complainant and her Mother are the only two ladies at home and the Opposite Party seems to have taken the same to his greatest advantage and dealt with them in very rude manner and harassed thoroughly throughout the period of delay in delivery and to take back the defective product for replacement. Therefore they lost trust on the Opposite Party and therefore seek refund of the amount paid for the products. Hence, the complaint.

2. In spite of service of notice, the Opposite Party has remained absent. In support of the complaint, the complainant has filed her affidavit and has produced copies of documents. Heard the complainant.

3. The points for consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party?

2. Whether the complainant entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the complaint?

4. Our findings are:-

Point No(1) : In the Affirmative



Point No(2) : As per final order

For the following:-


-:REASONS:-

5. Since in spite of service of notice, the Opposite Party has remained absent, the material on record has gone unchallenged. The copies of documents placed on record support the contention of the complainant regarding furniture purchased by the complainant from the Opposite Party. The allegation that on 18/07/2009 about four days after supply, there appeared some tearing at the seating leather of the Sofa has also remained unchallenged. As per the documents produced by the complainant, the Opposite Party has given warranty of five years for the said products. The complainant has also produced the Xerox copies of the Photographs with regard to the defects in the Sofa-set. The allegation of the complainant is that there is tearing of the leather at the seat of the Sofa-set. She has not alleged any defects in any other furniture purchased by her. That being so, if at all the complainant is entitled to any relief that would be in respect of the Sofa-set and not in respect of the other articles of furniture because the complainant has not alleged any defects in any other articles. In view of the fact that within four days from the date of delivery, certain defects are found in the Sofa-set, the complainant is entitled to seek replacement of the Sofa-set with a new one or to seek refund of the price paid for the same. The act of the Opposite Party in supplying the defective goods amounts to unfair trade practice. Failure to attend the complaints made by the complainant, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party. Therefore, we hold that the Opposite Party is liable either to replace the Sofa-Set with a new one or to refund the price paid for the same. The Opposite Party is also liable to pay compensation to the complainant for the mental agony and inconvenience caused. In our opinion, it is just and proper to award compensation of Rs.5,000/-. In the result, we pass the following:-

-:ORDER:-

1. The complaint is ALLOWED IN PART.
2. The Opposite Party is directed to take back the defective Sofa-set supplied to the complainant and to replace the same with a new Sofa-set of the same type or to refund the price paid for the same together with interest at 10% Per Annum from the date of purchase till the date of payment.
3. The Opposite Party is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.
4. Compliance of this order shall be made within eight weeks from the date of communication.
5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs, immediately.
6. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 11th Day of NOVEMBER 2009.