Complaint filed on: 16-09-2010
Disposed on: 18-02-2011
BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052
C.C.No.2126/2010
DATED THIS THE 18th FEBRUARY 2011
PRESENT
SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT
SRI.GANGANARASAIAH, MEMBER
SMT.ANITA SHIVAKUMAR.K., MEMBER
Complainant: -
Mrs.TARA, aged about 57 years,
Wife of Mr.Shantilal P.Shah,
Presently at GI Vastu Nirvana
Apartment, No.26, Railway Parallel
Road, Nehru nagar, Bangalore-20
V/s
Opposite party: -
M/s. THE BODY CARE,
Slimming and Beauty Clinic
For men and women,
Having its office at No.26/5,
Old No.26/A3, Adjacent to
Windsor Manor, Sankey Road,
Bangalore,
Represented by its Managing
Director
O R D E R
SMT.ANITA SHIVAKUMAR.K., MEMBER.
The grievance of the complainant against Op in brief is that the complainant had approached the Op’s for slimming and beauty clinic on 9/3/2010 to know about their clinic, where the representative of the Op had represented to the complainant that they are well versed in skin tightening and arm tucks with packs promising of about 3 inches loss. Believing their representation, the complainant had engaged the service of Op for arm trucks with packs and skin tightening on 10/3/2010 by paying a sum of Rs.7,500/- which was 50% of the totally agreed amount Rs.15,000/- The complainant attended the course/treatment for about 45 minutes on 10/3/2010. On 11/3/2010, one of the in-experience attendants of Op attended to the complainant and during the treatment negligently burnt the arm of the complainant severely. To that effect, the complainant had undergone medical treatment for about 15 days by spending about Rs 4,000/-. And the same was caused severe mental agony to her. In giving treatment due to Op’s in-experienced attendants, Op failed to keep up their promise and representation and burnt the arm of the complainant. Hence advance amount paid by the complainant to be refunded since Op had failed to treat the complainant in the proper agreed manner. The complainant further submitted that Op had intentionally caused burn injuries to the complainant and to make illegal gain. The same has been intimated to Op through legal notice dated 7/6/2010, calling upon them to refund the entire amount of Rs.7,500/- with compensation. Though it has been served on the Op, neither complied the claim of the complainant nor replied to the notice. Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of Op and approached this forum to seek direction to refund Rs.7,500/- with interest of 18% p.a and Rs.5,000/- compensation for mental agony.
2. Notice sent to Op was duly served on him. Op represented in person and filed his statement of objection. In his version, Op has totally denied the allegations and submitted that there is no possibility of any kind of burns being caused to the arms under any circumstances. Hence he prayed for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.
3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint the complainant has filed her affidavit evidence reproducing what she has stated in her complaint and Op has not filed his affidavit evidence. The complainant along with the complaint has produced the copy of cash memo for Rs.7,500/- issued by the Op, copy of photograph of burnt injury, copy of legal notice dated 7/6/2010. Counsel for complainant filed the written arguments, we have perused the records.
4. On the above materials, following points for determination arise.
1. Whether the complainant proves that the Op has
Caused deficiency in his service in not rendering treatment as promised?
2. To what reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?
5. Our findings are as under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative
Point No.2: See the Final order
REASONS:
6. Answer on point no. 1: The complainant has proved that she registered her name with the Op to take a treatment in skin tightening and arm tucks with pack by paying Rs.7,500/- which was 50% of the total amount of Rs.15,000/-. It is not denied by Op. Only dispute between the parties is that the complainant had attended one session for 45 minutes on 10/3/2010 and on 11/3/2010 she had been attended by the inexperienced attendant of Op who negligently burnt the arm of the complainant severely while treating her. For the reason she was unable to go for further treatment instead she had to undergo some medication for the burnt injury. The other averments made in the complaint are denied by the Op. Op submitted that the treatment involves stages like massage of the arms, administering of vibration to the arms by vibrator and application of thermo pack in the form of paste to the arm. These three stages of treatment never caused any kind of injury/burns to the body. Hence, the allegations made by the complainant are false and baseless.
7. On perusal of the photograph of the injured arm, the treatment given by the Op was not in proper manner and caused burnt. This has been intimated to Op through legal notice dated 7/6/2010. The complainant requested them to refund her money with 18% interest though it was served on him, he neither complied the claim of the complainant nor replied to the notice of the complainant. When the complainant could not attend the further treatment sessions due the inconvenience caused by the OP, Op has not rendered any service to fulfill her agreed treatment, thus retaining money of the complainant is not justifiable. Op has not used any kind of equipment, materials for treating the complainant Op has no right to keep her money without investing on her. Hence, we are of the view that Op is liable to refund her money and also liable to compensate for the deficiency in service in treating her in improper manner. The complainant proved the negligence of Op and Op has also not replied to her notice when she requested regarding the refund of Rs.7,500/-. The OP though when has not suffered any financial loss and rendered service fully cannot deny the full refund.
8. Considering all these facts, we are of the view that complainant has proved her grievance against OP and OP caused deficiency in service as such. We pass the following order.
O R D E R
Complaint is allowed.
Op is directed to refund Rs.6,500/- to the complainant after deduction of Rs.1,000/- towards a session of treatment given by the Op and towards other processing expenses.
Op is further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to the complainant towards cost.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Got it transcribed and corrected, Pronounced on the Open Forum on this 18th February 2011.
Member Member President
