DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM
Dated this the 29th day of May 2023
Filed on: 01/10/2020
PRESENT
Shri.D.B.Binu President
Shri.V.Ramachandran Member
Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N Member
CC NO. 284/2020
COMPLAINANT
Thazhappillil Devasia Thomas, S/o K.M. Devassia, 8 D, Artia apartments, Perumanoor Post, Kochi - 682 015.
VS
OPPOSITE PARTY
The Centre Square Mall, Rajaji Junction, MG Road, Kochi – 682035
F I N A L O R D E R
D.B.Binu, President
- A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:
The complaint was filed under Section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant received an SMS from the opposite party offering a one-day sale on footwear and handbags, with a 50% discount and an additional discount of Rs. 500. To avail the offer, the complainant registered through the provided link and paid Rs. 100. Later, the complainant received another SMS previewing the offer. Based on the trust in these SMS offers, the complainant purchased footwear worth Rs. 7,290 from the opposite party, expecting a 50% discount and an additional Rs. 500 discounts. The complainant fulfilled the conditions by purchasing footwear worth more than Rs. 4,999. However, the opposite party did not provide the promised discounts, leading the complainant to allege unfair trade practices. The complainant claims entitlement to a 50% discount of Rs. 7,290 and an additional discount of Rs. 500, which they had already paid. Additionally, the complainant seeks compensation of Rs. 5,000 for mental agony, financial loss, and inconvenience caused by the transactions and purchase.
2). Notice
Notice was issued from the Commission to the opposite party. The opposite party received the notice and filed the version.
3). VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY
M/s. Peevees Projects Private Limited operates the Centre Square Mall on M.G. Road in Kochi. The mall has approximately 86 tenants, including Future Life Style Fashions Ltd, trading under the brand name "Central." Peevees Projects Private Limited is primarily involved in construction and leasing activities and has leased the Centre Square Mall to various tenants, including Central. A lease agreement was signed between Peevees Projects and Central on 21 April 2020, establishing a tenant-landlord relationship.
The current dispute relates to the activities of Central within the mall. Peevees Projects asserts that it has no involvement or responsibility regarding Central's marketing and promotional activities. They claim that they are not legally liable for any misrepresentations made by the tenants. Peevees Projects states that they ensured Central obtained all necessary statutory approvals to commence their business within the mall. However, beyond this compliance, Peevees Projects cannot guarantee or be held accountable for other matters pertaining to Central's operations.
4) . Evidence
The complainant had produced a proof affidavit and 3 documents that was marked as Exhibits-A-1 to A-3.
Exhibit A-1. A true printout copies of the said SMS dated 29/06/2020.
Exhibit A-2. A true printout of the acknowledgement for registration issued by the opposite party
Exhibit A-3. A true copy of the printout of the tax invoice/bill of supply retail invoice dated 3/7/2020.
5) The main points to be analysed in this case are as follows:
i) Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?
ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party to the complainant?
iii) If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from the side of the opposite party?
iv) Costs of the proceedings if any?
6) The issues mentioned above are considered together and are answered as follows:
The above case is filed by the complainant for compensation for the deficiency in service of opposite party
In connection with the offering a one-day sale on footwear and handbags.
In response to the complaint, the opposing party submitted a written version arguing that they are not liable for the mental distress, financial harm, and inconvenience resulting from the transactions and purchases mentioned in the complaint.
The relevant portion of the version filed by the opposite party may be quoted as follows:
“We have a tenant-landlord relationship with Central by virtue of lease agreement dated 21 April 2020. The matter in dispute is concerning to the activities of Central and our Company has no role in the same whatsoever. We are not interfering into the marketing and promotional activities of our tenants and are not legally liable to answer the misrepresentations if any done by tenants. We have ensured that the said tenant has complied with all statutory approvals during the commencement of business in our premises and beyond that we cannot guarantee nor are responsible on any other matters.”
The complaint is not maintainable on the ground that it suffers from principle of mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties.
In view of the findings in relation to issue Nos. (I) and. (II), the question of the complainant being entitled to compensation does not arise. Accordingly, this Commission found answers to issue Nos. (i) , (ii), (iii), and (iv) in the negative, i.e., not in favour of the complainant and hence the following orders are issued.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the complaint is not maintainable and requires to be dismissed. Hence the order.
ORDER
In the result, the complaint is dismissed with no cost.
Pronounced in the Open Commission this the 29th day of May 2023.
Sd/-
D.B.Binu, President
Sd/-
V.Ramachandran, Member
Sd/-
Sreevidhia T.N., Member
Forwarded/by Order
Assistant Registrar
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
APPENDIX
COMPLAINANT’S EVIDENCE
Exhibit A-1. A true printout copies of the said SMS dated 29/06/2020.
Exhibit A-2. A true printout of the acknowledgement for registration issued by the opposite party.
Exhibit A-3. A true copy of the printout of the tax invoice/bill of supply retail invoice dated 3/7/2020.
OPPOSITE PARTY’S EVIDENCE
Nil
Despatch date:
By hand: By post
kp/
CC No. 284/2020
Order Date: 29/05/2023
