DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 26^th day of June, 2024.                                                                                             

                           Filed on: 09/01/2023

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                          President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                              Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                              Member                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

C.C. No. 17/2023

COMPLAINANT

Manoj Kumar Varma, S/o Bhuneshwar Varma, RLY QTS No.143-E, Near Ernakulam Jn. Rly Station, Ernakulam-Kerala, PIN:682016.

Vs.

OPPOSITE PARTY

SS Engineering Works and Upholstery Works (Branch SS Bazar) Thammanam- Karanakodam, Ernakulam-Kerala, PIN:682032

FINAL ORDER

D.B. Binu, President:

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complaint was lodged under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The Complainant ordered a three-door wooden almirah on 25-08-2022 from SS Engineering Works and Upholstery Works, Thammanam-Karanakodam, Ernakulam, for Rs. 17,000/- including free home delivery and a five-year guarantee. A token payment of Rs. 1,000/- was made on the same day, with the balance to be paid upon delivery. The almirah was delivered on 16-09-2022, and the remaining Rs. 16,000/- was paid via Delivery Chalan no.246.

The Complainant noticed an external defect on the almirah at the time of delivery and informed Siyad, the owner of SS Engineering Works, who attributed the issue to poor lighting. The next day, the Complainant discovered additional damage to the middle door and incomplete work on the roof of the almirah. Despite multiple follow-ups and promises from Siyad for a replacement, no action was taken.

On 27-10-2022, the Complainant visited SS Engineering Works, and Siyad promised a replacement within three days, noted in the order book. However, the almirah was not replaced, and calls to SS Engineering Works went unanswered. The Complainant alleges that SS Engineering Works intentionally delivered a defective almirah due to the Complainant being North Indian, constituting unfair trade practices.

Reliefs Claimed:

1. Refund of Rs. 17,000/-
2. Compensation of Rs. 4,95,000/- for mental agony and harassment
3. Cost of litigation

2. Notice:

The notice to the opposite party was sent by the commission. However, despite accepting the notice, the opposite party did not file a version, and as a result, they are set ex parte.

3. Evidence:

The complainants submitted an ex-parte proof affidavit along with two documents, marked as Exhibits-A-1 to A-2.

• Exhibit-A-1: The copy of the order form
• Exhibit-A-2: The copy of the delivery challan

4. Points for Analysis:

i) Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?

ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party to the complainant?

iii) If so, whether the complainant is entitled to any relief from the side of the opposite party?

 iv) Costs of the proceedings if any?

5. The issues mentioned above are considered together and are answered as follows:

In the present case, as per Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration that has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. The copy of the delivery challan and made payments produced by the complainant confirm that he is a consumer as defined under the Act. The receipt evidencing payment to the opposite party (Exhibit A-2) supports this.

The complainant initiated legal action to seek redress for the deficiencies in service and the engagement in unfair trade practices by the opposite party.

The evidence presented included an ex-parte proof affidavit filed by the complainant, and it was unchallenged by the opposite party. Therefore, the complainant's claims were considered credible and supported by the evidence. The opposite party's conscious failure to file their written version despite having received the Commission’s notice amounts to an admission of the allegations leveled against them. The case of the complainant stands unchallenged by the opposite party. The Hon’ble National Commission held a similar stance in its order dated 2017 (4) CPR page 590 (NC).

A. Deficiency in Service and Negligence:

The delivery of a defective almirah and the subsequent failure to replace it, despite repeated assurances, constitute a clear deficiency in service under Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The opposite party's behavior also amounts to negligence, as they failed to take reasonable care to provide a defect-free product and address the legitimate grievances of the consumer.

B. Liability of the Opposite Party:

Based on the above observations and analysis, it is clear that the opposite party is liable for deficiency in service and negligence. The opposite party’s failure to respond to the Commission’s notice further strengthens the complainant’s case.

The evidence on record clearly establishes that the opposite party failed to provide a defect-free almirah and did not honour their commitment to replace the defective product. This not only caused financial loss to the complainant but also mental agony and harassment. The complainant is entitled to compensation for these reasons.

The non-redressal of consumer grievances amounts to a deficiency in service. Furthermore, failure to render services as per the contract constitutes a deficiency in service. It is the duty of the trader to ensure that the goods and services provided to consumers meet the agreed standards and expectations. Traders are obligated to address any grievances promptly and effectively, ensuring that consumers are not subjected to inconvenience or distress due to negligence or unfair trade practices.

We have carefully heard the submissions made at length by the complainant and have also considered the entire evidence on record.

We determine that issue numbers (I) to (IV) are resolved in the complainant's favour due to the significant deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of the opposite party. Consequently, the complainant has endured considerable inconvenience, mental distress, hardships, and financial losses as a result of the negligence of the opposite party.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant.

Hence the prayer is partly allowed as follows:

1. The opposite party is directed to refund the amount of ₹17,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Only) to the complainant as evidenced by Exhibit A-2.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay ₹25,000 (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand Only) as compensation for monetary loss, mental agony, and hardship suffered by the complainant due to the significant deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of the opposite party.
3. The opposite party shall also pay the complainant ₹10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) towards the cost of the proceedings.

The opposite party is mandated to comply with the directives mentioned above within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. Failure to comply with the payment orders under points I and II will result in interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint (09-01-2023) until the date of full payment realization.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 26^th day of June, 2024

Sd/-

    D.B. Binu, President

                                                                                                Sd/-

Ramachandran, Member

Sd/-

Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

Forwarded/By Order

Assistant Registrar

Appendix

Complainant’s Evidence

Exhibit-A-1: The copy of the order form

Exhibit-A-2: The copy of the delivery challan

Opposite party’s Exhibits

Nil

Despatch date:

By hand:     By post                                                       

kp/

CC No. 17/2023

Order Date: 26/06/2024