Date of Filing:14.12.2022

Date of Disposal:28.04.2023

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BENGALURU

1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.

ORDER

SMT.NANDINI.H.KUMBHAR, MEMBER

1. This complaint is filed by the complainant under section 35 of the C.P.Act, 2019 against the OPs alleging deficiency of service.  

2.   The brief facts of the case is as follows: 

The complainant approached OP through online on 12.09.2022 to getting the interior design and decorator to the schedule property. On 17.09.2022 the OP has sent 1^st quotation of Rs.6,83,000/-, order placed by the requirements of the complaint in the meeting dt.14.09.2022 and it was assured and promised by theOP that from the payment of 1^st installment within 48 hours the OP would visit the schedule property with technical team and entire interior work will be completed well on time on or before 45 days and after discount the estimation was arrived at Rs.6,07,999/-. Believing the OP, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.30,400/- i.e. 5% of the quotation amount to the OP on 30.09.2022 through UPI, but even after expiring 48 hours OP have never turned up for visit and inspecting the schedule property.

3. It is further stated that the OP was supposed to visit for masking/covering the walls on 18.10.2022 and final visit on 20.10.2022 along with final quotation, but the OP wanted to visit the flat masking on18.10.2022 at 10.00AM. Accordingly the complainant was very munch present at the flat before 10.00AM, but OP had not came. When the complainant enquired, finally the OP team had came at 11.45 noon and  there after OP did not visit  and provided quotation of the property on 20.10.2022, and  by postponing for  on one or other pretext citing some reason. On 26.10.2022 OP team along with project manager visited and provided a final quotation for a sum of Rs.8,45,000/-, but the complainant was shocked to see the final quotation which was exorbitant and unreasonable and completely different during the discussion and the complainant having completely dissatisfaction and displeasured with the communications, conduct and actions of the OP. On the 04.11.2022 the complainant has cancelled the proposal of the service of the OP and required to refund the advance amount paid by the complainant. Despite persistent and continuous follow ups and communications the complainant left unattended by OP. The OP has deliberately  delayed to provide proper service  by  souring the prices and charges. Aggrieved by the act of the OP the complainant filed this complaint seeking refund of the amount along with other relief as prayed in the complaint.

4. Notice to the OP duly served, OP remained absent and OP is placed ex-parte.

5. The complainant has also filed chief examination affidavit by reiterating the complaint allegations and also filed documents in support of their plea.

6. Heard arguments and matter is reserved for orders.

7.  The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the Complainant prove that there is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs as alleged in the complaint and thereby prove that he is entitle for the relief sought?
2. What order?

8. The findings on the above points are as under:

Point No.1           :       Affirmative

Point No.2           :       As per final order

REASONS

9. POINT NO.1:-  The complainant approached OP through online on 12.09.2022 to getting the interior design and decorator to the schedule property. On 17.09.2022 the OP has sent 1^st quotation of Rs.6,83,000/-, order placed by the requirements of the complaint in the meeting dt.14.09.2022 and it was assured and promised by the  OP that from the payment of 1^st installment within 48 hours the OP would visit the schedule property with technical team and entire interior work will be completed well on time on or before 45 days and after discount the estimation was arrived at Rs.6,07,999/-. Believing the OP, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.30,400/- i.e. 5% of the quotation amount to the OP on 30.09.2022 through UPI, but even after expiring 48 hours OP have never turned up for visit and inspecting the schedule property.

10. It is further stated that the OP was supposed to visit for masking/covering the walls on 18.10.2022 and final visit on 20.10.2022 along with final quotation, but the OP wanted to visit the flat masking on18.10.2022 at 10.00AM, but  the OP team had came at 11.45 noon and  there after OP did not visit  and provided quotation of the property on 20.10.2022, and by postponing for one or other pretext citing some reason. On 26.10.2022 OP team along with project manager visited and provided a final quotation for a sum of Rs.8,45,000/-, but the complainant was shocked to see the final quotation which was exorbitant and unreasonable and completely different during the discussion and the complainant having completely dissatisfaction and displeasured with the communications, conduct and actions of the OP. On the 04.11.2022 the complainant has cancelled the proposal of the service of the OP and requested  to refund the advance amount paid by the complainant. Despite persistent and continuous follow ups and communications the complainant left unattended by OP. The OP has deliberately  delayed to provide proper service  by  souring the prices and charges. Aggrieved by the act of the OP the complainant filed this complaint seeking refund of the amount along with other relief as prayed in the complaint.

11. Despite of serive of notice, OP remained absent and not chosen to contest the matter and has been placed exparte.

12. The complainant filed chief examination affidavit by reiterating the complaint averments as against OP and also produced relevant documents in support of their contention. From the perusal of the documents produced that is payment receipt paid to the OP. It is crystal clear that the complainant approached the OP for interior work for her schedule property and paid advance amount of Rs.30,400/- on 30.09.2022 as per documents produced. The complainant also produced WhatsApp chat between the complainant and OP and copy of the mail correspondence with customer care of the OP dt.04.11.2022, wherein the complainant bringing notice about all the facts, negligence and miscommunications and harassment caused to her by OP. For which the complainant sought for  the relief  of refund of Rs.30,400/-.

13. From the perusal of all these annexure  documents, the commission is of the opinion that there is a communication between OP and the complainant and the complainant has paid an advance amount of Rs.30,400/- for the service of the OP to getting interior design and decoration to the schedule property. After paying advance amount of Rs.30,400/- to the OP, the OP has raised the quotation which was exorbitant and unreasonable and the prices and charges are completely different from the discussion during the 1^st meeting held on 14.09.2022,which was assured by the OP and  as such the complainant was not satisfied with the communication, prices and charges mentioned in the final quotation. Due to which the complainant has cancelled the proposal and services of the OP and requested to refund the advance amount of  Rs.30,400/-. The OP has negligently and intentionally failed to give the service and delayed to provide service to the complainant after  the payment of 1^st installment amount the OP has started playing tricks by not keeping their words by visiting the schedule property for inspection and have utterly failed to communicate with the complainant further the OP unexpected with the price and  charges of materials and services have become apparent burden and pain to the complainant as so suffered. It is crystal clear from the act and conduct of the OP attracts deficiency in service, for which the OP is liable to refund the advance amount paid by the complainant.

14. In the absence of  any defence from the OP, the OP has not chosen to appear and to contest the complaint. In this regard the decision reported in 2018(1)CPR 325(NC) between Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd. V/s Dr.Nisha Gupta, wherein it is held that “Non-filing of the written version amounts to admission of allegations made by the complainant in the consumer complaint”.

15. In view of the above discussion and on perusal of the averments of the complaint and the documents produced, the complaint deserves to be allowed on merits and the OP is held liable to refund the amount along with other reliefs. Accordingly, we answer the Point No.1 in affirmative.

16. POINT NO.2:- In the result, for the forgoing reasons,  we passed the following:

                                         ORDER

1. The complaint filed by the Complainant U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is hereby allowed.
2. OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.30,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint till payment is made.
3. OP is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards deficiency of service and  Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

4.  Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties. 

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Commission on 28^th April  2023)

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)             (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)       

         MEMBER                                        MEMBER

Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit: Sri V.Sreelakshmi

Documents produced by the complainant:

Witness examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit: Nil

Documents produced by the OP:Nil
 

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)

         MEMBER                                     MEMBER

SKA*