DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM
Dated this the 24th day of May 2023
Filed on: 29/01/2022
PRESENT
Shri.D.B.Binu President
Shri.V.Ramachandran Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N Member
C C No. 74/2022
COMPLAINANT
MA Fathima Afrin, D/o.M. A Abdul Hakkim, Mullappily House, 65/3410 Opposite Royal Avenue, Ponth Road, Kaloor, Cochin, Pin-682 017
(By Adv.Jagan Abraham M.George and Adv.Jaison Antony,
M/s.J & J Associates, T-3, III Floor, Emire Building, Old Railway Station Road, Ernakulam-682 018)
Vs.
OPPOSITE PARTY
De fab In Style, NH Byepass, Chakkaraparambu, Vytilla, Kochi-682 032
F I N A L O R D E R
V.Ramachandran, Member
1) A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:
The complainant states that she had visited the textile cum tailoring shop of the opposite party for purchasing a party wear readymade gown on 05.12.2021. The opposite party sale staff told her that there are no stitched readymade gowns available with the opposite party and if materials are selected by the complainant, the opposite party shall get it stitched at consolidated rate. Believing the words of the opposite party sales personnel, the complainant purchased the material for the gown at the consolidated price of Rs.7,600/-. Subsequently on verification, the complainant found that the material cost is only Rs.1392/- and the opposite party charged exorbitant rate of Rs.6,300/- for getting the plain gown stitched. The complainant immediately sent back to the opposite party’s shop and requested to cancel the order for stitching. She requested to deliver the materials purchased by her and to refund the amount paid. The sales staff of the opposite party assured the complainant that the amount would be refunded on the next day. On next day the complainant and her mother contacted the opposite party asking them to refund the amount but the sale staff of the opposite party had not refunded the amount to the complainant. Thereafter the sales girl of the opposite party provided the mobile Number 9633999933 to the complainant for contacting the owner of the shop. The complainant and her father tried to contact the opposite party but they could not contact the opposite party. The complainant states that several attempts were made by the complainant for contacting the owner of the opposite party on different occasions, but all those were in vain. Therefore the complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite party which also was not answered by the opposite party. Aggrieved by the inaction from the side of the opposite party, the complainant approached this Commission seeking to issue orders to the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.6300/- along with other reliefs.
2) Notice
The Commission sent notice to the opposite party and the opposite party acknowledged the notice but they did not turn up to contest the case or they did not file their version. Hence the opposite party is set ex-parte.
3) Evidence
The complainant produced 6 documents from her side which were marked as Exbt.A1 to A6.
4) The following are the main points to be analysed in this case:
(1) Whether the complainant had experienced any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party?
(2) If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs?
(3) Costs of the proceedings?
5) Point No. (i) to (iii)
On verification of the documents produced by the complainant it can be seen that an amount of Rs.1392/- was paid by the complainant to the opposite party on 05.12.2021 being the cost of the dress material. It can also be seen from Exbt.A2 to A4 that the amount of Rs.1392/- and Rs.6300/- respectively had been paid by the complainant through debit card of Kotak Mahindra bank. Exbt.A5 goes to show that the complainant had sent a lawyer notice to the opposite party and Exbt.A6 is substantiating that the opposite party had received and acknowledged the lawyer notice.
The Commission made a thorough verification of documents and records produced by the complainant and also all the facts stated in the complaint as detailed above. The complainant had established the facts stated in the complaint on the strength of the above 6 documents which stands unchallenged by the opposite party. In the circumstances, the Commission issue orders as follows.
- The opposite party shall refund an amount of Rs.6300/- to the complainant.
- The opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs.10000/- to the complainant as compensation.
- The opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs.5000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
The above orders shall be complied with within, 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the amounts ordered above vide 1 and 2 shall attract interest @5.5% p.a. from date of receipt of amount by the opposite party to the complainant till the date of realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission this 24th day of May 2023.
Sd/-
V.Ramachandran Member
Sd/-
D.B.Binu President
Sd/-
Sreevidhia T.N., Member
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Assistant Registrar
Assistant Registrar APPENDIX
Complainant’s Evidence
Exhibit A-1: copy of invoice issued by the opposite party to the complainant
dated 05.12.2022
Exhibit A-2: copy of invoice issued by the opposite party to the complainant dated 05.12.2022 for stitching charges.
Exhibit A-3: copy of debit card receipt in which the complainant had done payment towards A1 invoice.
Exhibit A-4: : copy of debit card receipt in which the complainant had done payment towards A2 invoice
Exbt.A5 : copy of lawyer notice sent by the complainant to the opposite party
Exbt.A6 :: copy of postal acknowledgment receipt
Opposite party’s Evidence : Nil
