By: Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1. The complainant visited an exhibition conducted by a leading Malayalam News Paper in the name and style ‘veedu’ at Kannur Police ground. It was an exhibition of different items of different producers. The opposite party had a stall in the exhibition with furniture’s. The complainant and his friend Mr. Girish visited the exhibition on 07/12/2018 and purchased certain domestic articles. The complainant also thought of purchasing certain furniture to his newly constructed house. Some of the employees of the opposite party on seeing the complainant and his friend shown certain models of furnitures and said to him that pay an advance of Rs. 1,000/- and then the furnitures will be supplied at the residence within one week and that too without any delivery charge. The balance amount of the furniture only to be paid at the time of delivery of articles. The complainant believing the words of the opposite party ordered an Alamaraha model No.1005 worth Rs.14,500/- and also as a study table model No. 1078 worth Rs.6,750/-. The complainant paid 1000/- rupees as advance. The balance amount of Rs. 20,750/- was agreed to pay at the time of delivery of the articles.
2. The opposite party did not delivered the articles after one week and then the complainant contacted the opposite party over telephone. The opposite party apologized for the delay since there was number of bookings and so the delay caused. The opposite party assured that the articles will be delivered within one month. But even after one month there was no delivery of articles booked by the complainant. The complainant tried to contact opposite party over telephone but he declined to attend the telephone and on rare occasions it was replied that what he was told earlier. At last the complainant caused to issue a lawyer notice on 09/09/2019 and the same was received by the opposite party 25/09/2019. The opposite party did not issue reply nor sent the booked articles.
3. The act of the opposite party offering to the consumer and accepting advance amounts without intention to comply the offer amounts unfair trade practice. Complainant alleges there was no intention on the side of opposite party to provide the booked articles. The act of the opposite party amounts unfair trade practice and also there is deficiency in service. The complainant pray for refund of the advance amount and to pay an amount of Rs. 21,750/- as the cost of articles intended to purchase from the opposite party along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and cost.
4. On admission of the complaint issued notice to the opposite party but despite of receipt of notice opposite party did not turned up. Hence the Commission called him and set exparte .
5. The complainant filed affidavit and documents. The documents on the side of complainant marked as Ext. A1 to A3. Ext. A1 is receipt for booking dated 07/12/2018. Ext. A2 is copy of lawyer notice issued by the complainant on 09-09-2019. Ext. A3 is postal acknowledgment for the receipt of lawyer notice.
6. There is no version and affidavit on behalf of opposite party. The case of complainant stands proved through the affidavit. There is no contra evidence against the complainant. Hence the Commission allows this complaint as follows:-
- The opposite party is directed to refund the advance amount of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant .
- The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service thereby caused hardship and inconveniences to the complainant .
- The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceedings
The opposite party shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the opposite party is liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum to the complainant from the date of complaint to till realization.
` Dated this 24th day of January, 2022.
