1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :-



The complainant purchased an “air lounge comfort sofa bed” from the 1st opposite party for Rs. 6,294/-. The price of the commodity was debited from the credit card of the complainant with the HDFC Bank. Subsequent to the purchase, the adhesive beading of the sofa has broken away and the seat bulged, and in a few days the entire sofa bed became a ball shaped piece. On 22-11-07, the complainant lodged a complaint before the 1st opposite party demanding them either to refund the price or replacement with a new piece. The stuff supplied by the 1st opposite party is against their tall claims made in the advertisement and literature deceiving the customers tantamount to unfair trade practice. It is a clear case of deficiency in service and defect of the goods unscrupulously supplied. Therefore the complainant seeks the following directions against the 1st opposite party.

i) Either refund the cost of the sofa set or replace the same with a new piece.

ii) Compensation and cost.



2. The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were deleted as per the order dated 03-04-09 of this Forum. Eventhough notice was served on the 1st opposite party, they were absent during the proceedings. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A6 were marked from his side. The counsel for the complainant was heard.



3. Points that crop up for our consideration :-

i) Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of

its price?

ii) Compensation and costs?




4. Point Nos. i) & ii) :- The learned counsel Mr. P.D. Joseph appearing for the complainant submitted that the advertisement of the 1st opposite party induced the complainant to purchase the product under dispute for Rs. 6,294/-. Immediately after the delivery, it was found that it is of a 3rd rate stuff and hence it became a ball shaped piece. The written complaints made by the complainant to the 1st opposite party did not evoke any response from them.




5. Ext. A2 is the instructions supplied by the 1st opposite party along with the 'air-lounge comfort sofa bed' . Ext. A3 credit card statement of complaint dated 03-11-07 would show that an amount of Rs. 6,294/- has been debited in favour of the 1st opposite party. Ext. A4 and A5 are the complaints lodged by the complainant dated 22-11-07 and 10-02-08 respectively. It appears that the 1st opposite party has turned down the request of the complainant to replace the defective piece with a new one or to refund its price. The 1st opposite party ought to have responded to the legitimate claim of the complainant in the instant case which not done. Moreover, they have not cared to disprove the case of the complainant. From the above circumstances, it can be presumed that the 1st opposite party had supplied a defective product to the complainant. Due to the supply of the above product naturally the complainant has sustained lot of mental pain and suffering and he is entitled to receive compensation from the 1st opposite party. Furthermore, the complainant tried his level best to settle the dispute before approaching this Forum and thus he is entitled for the cost of the proceedings.




6. Consequently, we allow the complaint and direct that,

i) the 1st opposite party shall replace the 'air-lounge comfort sofa bed' under dispute with a new piece of the same brand and model or in the alternative, the 1st opposite party shall refund Rs. 6,294/- being the price of the same, liberty of choice of the above options will be that of the complainant only. In either of the cases, the complainant shall return the defective sofa bed to the 1st opposite party.

ii) the 1st opposite party shall pay Rs. 2,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant. All the above mentioned amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date fixed for compliance of this order till realisation.



The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.