Order by:
Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President
1. This Consumer Complaint has been received by transfer vide order dated 26.11.2021 of Hon’ble President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh under section 48 of CPA Act, vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana to District Consumer Commission, Moga to decide the same in Camp Court at Ludhiana and said order was ordered to be affected from 14th March, 2022.
2. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that in the month of September, 2017 he approached Opposite Parties for stitching of two trousers and after taking the measurement, the Opposite Parties raised a demand of Rs.1000/- for stitching of two trousers to which, Rs.100/- has been paid in advance and then Rs.400/- at the time of delivery of one trouser and remaining Rs.500/- to be paid on the delivery of second trouser. When the complainant went to the Opposite Parties for his second trousers and paid the remaining Rs.500/- to the Opposite Parties, he found that said single colored of the trouser has transferred to multi colour trouser as there as some other colour like reddish on the trouser and when the complainant enquired about the same, then the Opposite Parties told that due to washing with the other clothes and it will be removed after washing for two to three times. At this, the complainant asked the Opposite Parties to deliver the said trousers after removing its colour. Thereafter, the complainant visited the shop of the Opposite Parties many a times, but to no affect and lateron refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant and as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) The Opposite Parties may be directed to pay Rs.1000/- as costs of cloth, Rs.500/- on account of stitching charges and also to pay compensation amounting to Rs.50,000/- or any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission may deem fit be also granted.
3. Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has attempted to misguide and mislead this District Consumer Commission. It is submitted that the true facts are that the Opposite Parties are doing the business of only tailoring and the complainant approached the Opposite Parties alongwith fabric/ clothes for stitching of his two trousers and accordingly, the Opposite Parties alongwith fabric/ clothes for stitching of his two trousers and accordingly, the Opposite Parties took the fabric/ cloth from the complainant and also took the measurement of the complainant. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties stitched the said two trousers of the complainant and after stitching the complainant 5ook the abovesaid both the trousers from the Opposite Parties after checking its fitting. Moreover, the Opposite Parties only do the work of stitching and not washing. Moreover, at the time of delivery of trousers, the same were in very good condition and after satisfaction, the complainant also made the payment to the Opposite Parties. Moreover, the responsibility of the Opposite Parties is only on stitching, but not on fabric quality. If any defect occurs on the fabric, then the manufacturer is responsible for the same and as such, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents placed on record.
6. Ld.counsel for the Complainants as well as ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties have mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in their written statements respectively. We have perused the rival contention of the ld.counsel for the parties. The only contention of the complainant is that at the time of delivery of the second trouser, said single colored of the trouser has transferred to multi colour trouser as there as some other colour like reddish on the trouser and when the complainant enquired about the same, then the Opposite Parties told that due to washing with the other clothes and it will be removed after washing for two to three times. At this, the complainant asked the Opposite Parties to deliver the said trousers after removing its colour. Thereafter, the complainant visited the shop of the Opposite Parties many a times, but to no affect and lateron refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant and as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel of the complainant on the ground that actually, the Opposite Parties are doing the business of only tailoring and the complainant approached the Opposite Parties alongwith fabric/ clothes for stitching of his two trousers and accordingly, the Opposite Parties alongwith fabric/ clothes for stitching of his two trousers and accordingly, the Opposite Parties took the fabric/ cloth from the complainant and also took the measurement of the complainant. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties stitched the said two trousers of the complainant and after stitching the complainant took the abovesaid both the trousers from the Opposite Parties after checking its fitting. Moreover, the Opposite Parties only do the work of stitching and not washing. Moreover, at the time of delivery of trousers, the same were in very good condition and after satisfaction, the complainant also made the payment to the Opposite Parties. Moreover, the responsibility of the Opposite Parties is only on stitching, but not on fabric quality. If any defect occurs on the fabric, then the manufacturer is responsible for the same. We are of the view that to prove the aforesaid allegations made by the complainant on the Opposite Parties, the complainant has failed to produce and prove any iota of evidence. First of all, as stated above by the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties is only doing the work of tailoring and not the washing. Moreover, for the sake of arguments, if it is admitted that while stitching the trousers, its colour has been faded or transferred to multi colour trousers as alleged by the complainant, but it is not the case of the complainant that he had purchased the said fabric from the Opposite Parties. Moreover, the complainant has not impleaded the manufacturer of said fabric/ cloth as necessary party. So, from all the corners, we fail to understand how the complainant has alleged deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we found no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and hence, the instant complaint stands dismissed. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost by District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room after compliance.
8. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This Consumer Complaint was originally filed at District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission) at Ludhiana and it keep pending over there until Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 has transferred the instant Consumer Complaint alongwith Other Complaints to District Consumer Commission, Moga with directions to work on this file onward from 14th March, 2022 and accordingly District Consumer Commission, Moga has decided the present complaint at Camp Court, Ludhiana, as early as possible as it could decide the same
Announced in Open Commission at Camp Court, Ludhiana.
