Haryana

Karnal

CC/217/2023

Anoop Bharti - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vision Communication - Opp.Party(s)

12 Sep 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No. 217 of 2023

                                                        Date of instt.10.04.2023

                                                        Date of Decision:12.09.2023

 

Anoop Bharti (age 34 years) son of Shri Jagdish Chander, resident of New Anaj Mandi, Sector-3, Karnal, Aadhar no.544678151253.

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Vision Communication, 319-R, main market, near SBI bank, Model Town, Karnal-132001 through its proprietor/partner Kabir Singh, Mobile no.98963-8000.

 

2. Kabir Singh, proprietor/partner of Vision Communication, 319-R, main market, near SBI Bank, Model Town, Karnal-132001.

 

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.

              Shri Vineet Kaushik……Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

                   

Argued by: Complainant in person.

                   OPs exparte (vide order dated 19.05.2023).

 

                    (Vineet Kaushik, Member)

ORDER:

                  

                The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant had purchased a new Split AC (LG 5 Star) worth Rs.42,300/- from the OPs on 26.03.2023. At the time of purchase of said air conditioner, OPs asked the complainant to pay Rs.43,500/- through online but when the complainant protested that why they would pay an extra amount of Rs.1200/- then the OPs assured the complainant that after the receipt of said amount through online he would sent the excess amount of Rs.1200/- to the complainant alongwith the delivery of air conditioner at the premises of the complainant. Accordingly, on demand of the OP, complainant paid Rs.43,500/- to the OP online through his credit card. On the very next day i.e. 27.03.2023, OPs sent the said air conditioner alongwith bill at the premises of the complainant but the representative of the OPs refused to give Rs.1200/- to the complainant as assured by OPs. The complainant immediately contacted the OPs telephonically and requested him to return the said amount of Rs.1200/- to the complainant. OPs asked the complainant to visit his showroom in the evening time and promised to return the said amount but when complainant went to showroom, OPs asked the complainant that today accountant is not available and then come after 2-3 days . After 2-3 days, complainant visited the showroom of OPs and demanded Rs.1200/- but at that time OPs flatly refused to pay the said amount. Due to this act and conduct of OP, complainant became in depression. Moreover, OP issued the invoice of the aforesaid air-conditioner of Rs.42,300/-. Thus, OP is liable to return the amount of Rs.1200/- to the complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs did not appear despite service and opted to be proceeded against exparte, vide order dated 19.05.2023 of the Commission.

3.             Complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of detail of transaction of Rs.43,500/- through credit card Ex.C1, copy of tax invoice of Rs.42,300/- dated 26.03.2023 Ex.C2, copy of current statement of account Ex.C3, copy of aadhar card Ex.C4 and closed the evidence on 11.07.2023 by suffering separate statement.

4.             We have heard the complainant and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

5.             As per the version of the complainant is that on 26.03.2023 he purchased one Split AC amounting to Rs.42,300/- from the OPs. At the time of purchase, OPs asked the complainant to pay Rs.43,500/- through online but when the complainant protested that why they would pay an extra amount of Rs.1200/- then the OPs assured the complainant that after the receipt of said amount through online he would sent the excess amount of Rs.1200/- to the complainant but OPs failed to return the said amount after repeated requests and visits of complainant and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

6.             The onus to prove his version was relied upon the complainant. To prove his version, complainant has placed on file his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of detail of transaction of Rs.43,500/- through credit card Ex.C1, copy of tax invoice of Rs.42,300/- dated 26.03.2023 Ex.C2, copy of current statement of account Ex.C3, copy of aadhar card Ex.C4. It is evident from the copy of detail of transaction Ex.C1 dated 26.03.2023, complainant has paid Rs.43,500/- to the OPs as cost of the AC in question whereas it is evident from the tax invoice Ex.C2 dated 26.03.2023, the cost of the Act in question is Rs.42,300/-. Hence, it is well proved on record, OPs have received excess amount of Rs.1200/- from the complainant.        

7.             To rebut the evidence produced by the complainant, OPs did not appear and opted to be proceeded against exparte. Thus, the evidence of complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the same.  Hence, complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs.1200/- alongwith compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony and towards litigation expenses.

8.             Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.1200/- to the complainant. We further direct the OPs to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment and  towards the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied with within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated:12.09.2023

                                                                  President,

                                                       District Consumer Disputes

                                                       Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                     Member                        Member