Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/510/2022

Ridhima Thakur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Dressco - Opp.Party(s)

Devinder Kumar

11 Sep 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	510/2022
Date of Institution	:	16.06.2022
Date of Decision	:	11.09.2023

 

                     

            

 

Ridhima Thakur w/o Sh.Nitin aged about 41 years r/o Flat No.1028, Tower G, Escon Arena Apartment, Nagla Road, Zirakpur, Distirct SAS Nagar, Mohali.

 

    ...  Complainant.

Versus

 

M/s Dressco, B-IV-996, Rura Mal Street, Ludhiana, Punjab through its Proprietor/Partner.

 

…. Opposite Party.

 

BEFORE:-
	SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
PRESENT:-
	Sh.Devinder Kumar, Adv. for complainant Sh.Sourabh, Adv. Proxy for Sh.Satish Kumar, Adv. for OP.

 

 

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1.     The complainant has filed the present complaint pleading that she is running a Kindergarten School at Rohru to earn her livelihood and paid Rs.30,300/-  through Google Pay App to the OP for purchase of Hoddies and Lower for the students studying in the school but the OP provided the  Tax Invoice No.390 dated 26.02.2022 for Rs.12,936/- (Annexure C-2) only. Immediately, the complainant brought the same to notice of the OP and requested them to provide the invoice for the full amount paid by her but they did not bother to do so. Further the school dresses after just wearing for five days faded away due to poor quality material and the quality was not found upto the mark. Therefore, the complainant requested the OP to refund the amount of the school dresses but all in vain. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of commission on the part of the OP of selling the defective goods to the complainant and also unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint seeking directions to the OP to refund the   amount of the school dresses along with   interest, compensation for mental agony and physical harassment as well as litigation expenses.
2.     After service of the notice upon the OP, they appeared before this Commission through its Counsel and filed its written version taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable  as the complainant purchased the school dresses for business/resale purposes and that this Commission has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. The OP denied all the allegations made in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
3.     The complainant filed replication to the written reply of the OP controverting its stand and reiterating her own.
4.     We have heard the Counsel for the contesting parties and have gone through the documents on record along with written submissions.
5.     The OP has taken the preliminary objection that this Commission has no territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint as neither the complainant is resident of Chandigarh nor the OP is doing the business within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. In answer to this objection it is observed that the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.30,300/- to the OP through Google Pay App through her bank i.e. State Bank of India, Sector 42, Attawa, Chandigarh which is duly proved by placing on record the documents Annexures C-5 and C-11 i.e. statement of account of the complainant maintained at Branch Attawa of State Bank of India situated at Chandigarh within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission from where the transaction was made and thus a part of cause of action arose within the territory of Chandigarh  and, therefore, this Commission has got the territorial jurisdiction to try, entertain and adjudicate upon the present complaint.
6.     The second preliminary objection taken by the OP is that the complainant is not a consumer as the goods are purchased by her for resale to the children of the school and they are not purchased for her personal use. This objection is also not sustainable in the eyes of law because the complainant in her complaint has specifically mentioned that she is running a ‘Kindergarten’ for running her livelihood.  As the complainant is running a ‘Kindergarten’ for earning her livelihood by way of self-employment so she is a consumer as per the definition of consumer provided under Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
7.     It is observed that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.30,300/- through Google Pay App for the purchase of the school dresses. As per the statement of account i.e. Annexure C-1, it is proved that the complainant paid the amount of Rs.30,300/- to the OP but they had issued the Tax Invoice for the amount of Rs.12,936/- (Annexure C-2), which amounts to unfair trade practice on its part. Further, the complainant has placed on record the whatsapp messages as Annexures C-5 to C-7 exchanged between the parties regarding the inferior quality of the school dresses, not upto the mark as per the promises. Further, the complainant has also placed on record the photos of the school dresses which shows that the condition thereof has deteriorated very soon after their purchase and the same were not upto the mark. The complainant has also placed on record a copy of the legal notice sent to the OP through advocate requiring the OP to refund the amount of Rs.30,300/- but the OP failed to do so.  Thus, it is safely held that the OP has not only sold out the defective goods to the complainant but also indulged into unfair trade practice by not issuing the invoice for the full amount of Rs.30,300/- of the sold products.
8.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be partly allowed and the same is accordingly partly allowed. The OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.30,300/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of its purchase till its actual realization to the complainant.
9.      This order be complied with by the OP within 60 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall be liable as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
10.     The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
11.     Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced 11/09/2023
	Sd/- (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/-
	(B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER