BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PONDICHERRY

C.C.No.1/2014

Dated this the 9^th day of February 2016

A.Ramasamy, son of Arikrishnan

No.33, Third Cross,

Thilakar Nagar

Pondicherry.

                                                         ….     Complainant

Vs.

The Authorized Signatory

New Tiruppur Export Garments

No.15, Jawaharlal Nehru Street  

Karikar Building, Pondicherry – 1.

                                                          ….     Opposite Party

BEFORE:

          THIRU.A.ASOKAN, B.A., B.L.,

          PRESIDENT 

Tmt. PVR. DHANALAKSHMI, B.A.,B.L.,

           MEMBER

Thiru V.V. STEEPHEN, B.A., LL.B.,

           MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT :        Thiru I. Ilangkumar, Advocate .

FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY  :   Thiru S.P. Vassudevan, Advocate

O R  D  E  R

(By  Thiru A. Asokan, President)

This is a complaint filed by the complainant praying to direct the opposite party:

1. To exchange the defective Chutidar Top material or to refund the amount of Rs.330/- for the defective Chutidar Top Material;
2. To pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the mental agony, pain and sufferings which the complainant suffered due to Unfair Trade Practice and Deficiency in Service.                                                  
3. To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- being the cost of this complaint.

2. The case of the complainant is as follows:

          The complainant has purchased some garments for his family members from the Opposite Party vide Bill Nos. 578 and 580 for Rs.1,400/- and Rs.330/- respectively.  On 03.07.2013 he went to Tailor shop for stitching and found a defect in the Chutidar Top Sleeves one is smaller than another.  The said material was purchased vide bill No. 580/- for Rs.330/-.  The complainant asked the opposite party to exchange the same but the Opposite Party has refused for the same and threatened him with filthy languages and forcibly insists the complainant to get out of the shop and also seized the bill from the complainant and endorsed on the bill that "without sleeves" and "we will not exchange" and intimidated the complainant.  Due to the dereliction of duty and deficiency on the part of the opposite party, the complainant suffered loss and injury.  Hence, the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite party on 21.08.2013 demanding to exchange the defective Chutidar top material  and pay a compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh and litigation cost of Rs.2000/-.  The said notice was acknowledged by the opposite party on 23.08.2013 and gave vexatious reply and also offered to take new dress material for Rs.330/- and not mentioned about the compensation.  Since the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice, the complainant has filed this complaint.

          3. The following are the averments narrated in the reply version filed by the opposite party:

          The opposite party admitted the purchase of dress material on 2.7.2013 for Rs.330/- by the complainant vide bill No. 580.  The Chudithar top is a readily made one for use straightaway.  Further stated that in the bottom of the bill, it is mentioned as "Goods once sold cannot be taken back".  After a period of few days, the complainant came to opposite party's shop, returned the same chudithar material and demanded to payback the amount.  Though once the goods sold cannot be taken back, in order to fulfill the requirement of the customers and to render proper service to their customers, the opposite party requested the complainant to bring the said materials for exchange in the same was as it was sold, since all the staff of the opposite party were attending the other customers. The complainant left the shop and came after 45 minutes and shouted and began to act rudely saying that he is a Government Servant and he knows all the political leaders, VIPs and Police Officials and threatened the Opposite party with dire consequences and phoned to some other persons and asked them to come to the shop.  This Opposite Party requested the complainant not to create problems in front of other customers and do not precipitate this issue and upon request both the complainant and opposite party agreed to exchange the dress material in the same way as it was sold.  Since the complainant and other persons forced the opposite party to endorse "without sleeves" in the said bill, the opposite party endorsed the same.   When the complainant came to exchange the chudithar top, he had stated to the opposite party that while stitching the said chudithar top, it stained with oil drops over it.  When the same was questioned by the opposite party, the complainant started to threaten the opposite party with dire consequences.  It is further stated by the opposite party that their business is a small one and running for the past 20 years and till date they are successfully satisfying all types of customers, wherein, the opposite party have never faced such a misunderstanding, adamant and outrageous customer.  Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.

4.       To substantiate the case, on the side of the complainant,  though he was not examined as a witness, he has marked Exs.C1 to C5 and MO1.  On the other hand, the opposite party was examined as RW1, however, no documents were marked.

5. The Points for determination are:

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act?
2. Whether the Opposite party rendered deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled for?

6.       Point No.1:

          The complainant purchased a Chudithar top from the opposite party vide Ex.C2 for Rs.330/-.  Hence the complainant pays due consideration to the opposite party during the purchase of said dress material and therefore, this complainant is a consumer  within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.  This point is answered in favour of the complainant.

7.       Point No.2:

          The case of the complainant is that on 02.07.2013 he purchased some dress material vide Exs.C1 and C2 for a total sum of Rs.1730/-.  On the next day he found fault with the Chuditar top material such as the sleeves are in uneven size and hence, he went to the opposite party shop and asked for exchange of the same.  Since the alleged chutidar top material sustained some oil drops, the opposite party refused to exchange the same.  The complainant alleged that since his request of exchange was not conceded by the opposite party, he sent a legal notice dated 21.08.2013 vide Ex.C3 which was acknowledged by the opposite party on 23.08.2013 vide Ex.C4 and gave reply Ex.C5 admitting the defect in the material, he offered the complainant to take a new dress material worth Rs.330/- instead of exchange. 

          8. On the side of the opposite party, the  opposite party appeared and filed his reply version denying the alleged intimidation etc. It is alleged by the opposite party that since the oil drops are found in the dress materials which sought to be exchanged, he has refused to exchange it since it was not in the same way as it was sold.  The complainant demanded to return the money paid for the said material, but, as per Opposite Party, once goods sold cannot be taken back, however, in order to not to lose a customer, the opposite party has asked the complainant to take other dress materials to the value of Rs.330/- instead of same material and return of money.  But the complainant asked exchange of same chuditar.     The opposite party further claims that he cannot be held liable for any manufacturing defect and there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice committed by the opposite party.

          9. On perusal of complainant's side documents that are marked as Ex.C1 to C5,  we find that the complainant has purchased chuditar top material for Rs.330/- from the opposite party on 02.07.2013.  This Forum has also perused the material object marked in this case i.e. chudithar top and found uneven sleeves.  Further, the opposite party was examined as RW1 who admitted in his cross examination as "It is true that the sleeve on the one side in MO1 is uneven".  Further, the opposite party admitted that "It is true to say that I gave reply notice Ex.C5 and admitting to take new dress material for Rs.330/-."  Further the RW1 in his cross examination admitted that "due to oil drops present in the material MO1, he did not exchange the MO1".  From the above admission by the opposite party himself in his examination before this Forum, we find that the complainant has suffered mental agony and also the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the opposite party is confirmed.  Hence, this complaint is hereby allowed.

          10. Point No.3:

          In view of the decision taken in Point No.2, the complainant is entitled for the relief and therefore;

1. The opposite party is directed to return the cost of Rs.330/- being the cost of chudithar top material.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-                    towards compensation for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice;
3. The opposite party is  directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost of this proceedings.

          The opposite party is entitled to get back the Chudithar top (MO1) from this Forum after compliance of this order.

          The order should be complied within two months from the date of receipt of this order.

          Dated at Pondicherry on this the 9^th  day of February 2016.

1. ASOKAN)

PRESIDENT

(PVR. DHANALAKSHMI)

MEMBER

(V.V. STEEPHEN)

MEMBER

COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:   NIL

OPPOSITE PARTY’s WITNESS: 

RW1           12.08.2015           Bharath Kumar Jain

COMPLAINANT’S EXHIBITS:

OPPOSITE PARTY'S EXHIBITS:  Nil

LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECT:

MO1           Chudithar top materials -  1 no.

1. ASOKAN)

PRESIDENT

(PVR. DHANALAKSHMI)

MEMBER

(V.V. STEEPHEN)

MEMBER