BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PRESENT
SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER
C.C. No. 391/2012 Filed on 02.11.2012
Dated : 31.01.2013
Complainant :
Sajan Sony. V, Santhosh Vilasam, Kalamitta, Lourdepuram, Kanjiramkulam P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.
(Party in person)
Opposite party :
Manager, Mars-Inn/Home-Mate, Gokul Tower, 1st Floor, Malayinkil Junction, Thiruvananthapuram-71.
This O.P having been heard on 10.01.2013, the Forum on 31.01.2013 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER
Complainant has purchased a chappati maker from the opposite party on 01.09.2011 at Onam Stall conducted in Putherikandam Maithanam, Thiruvananthapuram. The opposite party charged an amount of Rs. 1,850/- for the same. But the price seen in the chappati maker is Rs. 850/-. At the time of purchase the opposite party stated that they reduced Rs. 500/- as Onam discount. Actually the opposite party cheated the complainant by believing so. The complainant further alleges that the chappati maker became damaged in a day's use. Complainant approached the opposite party for his grievance. But the opposite party not turned up to rectify the defects. Hence the complainant filed this complaint before this Forum.
Opposite party accepted notice of this complaint, but not turned up to contest the same. Hence opposite party remained ex-parte.
Issues to be considered are:-
Whether there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service from the side of opposite party?
Reliefs and costs.
Points (i) & (ii):- Complainant's case is that he had purchased a chappati maker from the opposite party on 01.09.2011 in Onam sales exhibition at Putherikandam Maithanam. Opposite party charged Rs. 1,850/- from the complainant for that chappati maker. The complainant alleges that the actual price of the same is Rs. 850/-. This price can be seen in the equipment. But the opposite party told that they sold the chappati maker in a discount rate. Complainant has produced the estimate as Ext. P1 and on the overleaf of Ext. P1 it can be seen that the opposite party received Rs. 1,400/-. Complainant told that he has paid Rs. 200/- as advance and the total amount paid by him is Rs. 1,600/-, he has filed affidavit for that payment. The complainant further states that the chappati maker became damaged in first use itself. He approached the opposite party for repairing the same. But the opposite party never turned up to rectify the defect. The complainant claims Rs. 10,000/- as compensation from the opposite party for his mental agony and other expenses. Opposite party remained exparte. Hence the affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged. Hence this forum find that the allegations levelled against the opposite party are correct and we find that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service from the side of opposite party.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and costs to the complainant. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order, otherwise 12% annual interest shall also be added to the amount till the date of realization.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 31st day of January 2013.
Sd/- BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
Sd/-
G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
Sd/-
S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
jb
C.C. No. 391/2012
APPENDIX
I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :
NIL
II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :
P1 - Estimate dated 06.09.2011 issued by opposite party
P1(a) - Overleaf of estimate showing receipt of Rs. 1,400/-.
III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :
NIL
IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :
NIL
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
jb
