Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V, Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
30th day of June 2016
CC.476/14 filed on 22/08/2014
Complainant : Asif A.A, Ambalath House, Vadanappilly P.O.,
Thrissur
(By Adv.Savitha P., Thrissur-3)
Opposite Parties : 1. Nandilath G.Mart, Global Electronics & Home
Appliances Plaza, West Gate, Poonkunnam,
Thrissur.
(By Adv.A.D.Benny, Thrissur-3)
2. Samsung Customer Satisfaction, Second Floor,
Tower C.Vipaltech Square, Sector 43, Golf Course
Road, Gurgaon, Haryana, India.
O R D E R
By : Ssri.P.K.Sasi, President
The case of the complainant is that on 16.08.2014, he has purchased a Samsung Washing Machine from the first opposite party by paying Rs.8000/-. He has selected the first opposite party shop and particularly the Samsung washing machine only because of the enticing advertisements published in the leading newspapers. As per their advertisements, for every Samsung Washing
Machine a scratch card was offered as a festival offer. But, the first opposite party has not provided the scratch card offered by them to the complainant when a Samsung washing machine was purchased by him. When he demanded for the scratch card the first opposite party has told him that it has to be provided by the company, you go and ask with the company. Then he contacted through the Toll Free No. and it was told to him that company has already provided scratch cards to their dealers and they are directed to provide the scratch card to all the customers and it is the duty of the dealer to give you the scratch card. Again he approached the first opposite party whereas, the first opposite party were not amenable to change their stand already taken. They told the complainant you go and take any measures for getting the card.
2. Then the complainant visited the Vadanappilly branch of the first opposite party and enquired regarding scratch card for Samsung washing machine. He was told that there is scratch cards and they will provide the scratch card to all the customers who are purchasing Samsung
Washing Machine. By denying the scratch card, complainant has lost his opportunity to participate in the scratch and win offers. There was a chance for even to get Rs. 1 lakhs. That was denied by the unfair act of the first opposite party. Such an act committed by the first opposite party amounts to deficiency in service as well as severe unfair trade practice to the complainant as well as to the customers in large. This is an illegal tactics followed by the first opposite party colluding with the 2nd opposite party for making undue gain. When the complainant approached before the first opposite party after confirming from 2nd opposite party that scratch cards are provided there for giving to the customers, the first opposite party behaved badly towards the complainant in the presence of other customers. Because of the act of the first opposite party complainant sustained severe mental agony as well as heavy hardship. Hence the complaint is filed for getting compensation.
3. On receiving complaint, notice was issued to both the opposite parties. The first opposite party appeared through counsel whereas, the 2nd opposite party neither appeared before the forum nor submitted any version. Hence the 2nd opposite party set exparte. The first opposite party filed version in which they have denied all the allegations stated by the complainant. According to the first opposite party the offer provided by the 2nd opposite party Samsung Company and they acted only as per the directions of the 2nd opposite party. There is no direct involvement for the first opposite party in this matter. By denying the scratch card to complainant the first opposite party is not at all benefitted by any reason. It is further submitted by the first opposite party that they have not behaved badly to the complainant and strongly denied such an allegation stated in the complaint. They further submitted that so far no other customer raised such an allegation against them. The first opposite party prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.
4. Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that ,
1) Whether, there was any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice happened on the part of opposite parties?
2) If so, what cost and relief.
5. From the side of complainant he has filed proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and submitted all the allegation stated in the complaint in detail. He also examined as PW1 and thoroughly cross examined by counsel for the first opposite party. He also produced 3 documents which are marked as Ext.P1 to P3. Ext.P1 is the copy of purchase retail invoice dated 16.08.20014; Ext.P2 is the photocopy of Malayalamanorama daily newspaper dated 02.08.2014; Ext.P3 is a photocopy of Malayalamanorama daily dated 08.08.2014.
6. From the side of first opposite party neither any counter proof affidavit filed nor any evidence adduced. Both sides filed detailed argument notes and we heard in details also.
7. This is a complaint filed by the complainant based on the denial of scratch card offered by the opposite parties. The first opposite party who contested the matter denied all the allegations stated in the complaint, whereas neither adduced any evidence nor produced any documents. However, the counsel for the first opposite party vehemently cross examined the complainant. In cross examination, the complainant categorically deposed that he has purchased a Samsung Washing Machine only by attracting with the advertisements published in the leading newspaper as well as in the visual medias. He also strongly denied the suggestion put forward by the counsel that the first opposite party has not denied any offer.
8. However, the purchase of the washing machine from the first opposite party is not admitted by them the Ext.P1 is evident for that the complainant has purchased a washing machine of Samsung company by paying Rs. 8000/- on 16.08.2014 from the first opposite party. The only question to be considered that, whether there was any offer during that time?. It is not denied by the contested opposite party that there was no such offer at that time. Moreover, the advertisements given in Ext.P2 and P3 news papers, very clearly shows that there was such an offer of scratch cards for the Samsung washing Machine during that festival period. There is no case for the first opposite party they have provided the card to the complainant. Since there is no contra evidence before us we are inclined to accept the affidavit filed by the complainant.
9. Considering all these points ,we are of the opinion that, the first opposite party has not provided scratch card to the complainant when he has purchased a Samsung washing machine from them as per the Ext.P1 invoice. That definitely amounts to unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service also. The first opposite party simply wash their hands by saying that it is the Samsung company to answer. It is the duty and liability of the first opposite party to provide the offers shown in the advertisements. By publishing the advertisements to attract the customers and hoodwink them by denying the offers shown in the advertisements is a common illegal practice followed by all the leading dealers like first opposite party. That cannot be entertained.
10. In the result, we allow this complaint and the first opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation to the complainant within 1 month from receiving copy of this order. Failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30th day of June 2016.
(Sd) (Sd) (Sd)
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1- copy of purchase retail invoice
Ext.P2- photocopy of Malayalamanorama daily newspaper dated 02.08.2014
Ext.P3- photocopy of Malayalamanorama daily dated 08.08.2014
Complainant’s witness
PW1-Asif A.A.
(Id)
President
