- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 25.11.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in Complaint Case No. 236/2010, whereby the appellant herein, has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 21,000, along with interest @ 6% p.a. w.e.f. 1.5.2010 to the complainant/respondent and also to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation, on account of supply of defective furniture to the respondent/complainant at the place of new and demanded furniture.
(2.) IT is not in dispute that respondent/ complainant paid a sum of Rs. 5,000 to the appellant/OP and booked in advance one Diwan, one Almirah, one side box and one central table on 25.9.2009. Remaining amount was paid to make the total cost of the furniture Rs. 21,000 and the furniture was purchased by the complainant.
(3.) THE allegation of the complainant is that the furniture, which was sent to the complainant/respondent by the appellant was of inferior quality. The fitting was also not appropriate. The Diwan could not be opened. Almirah was also old one having some scratches. Looking to these defects, the appellant was contacted by the complainant and he was requested to take back those old furniture and to provide in replacement good furniture. But when no heed was paid by the appellant to the request of the complainant, then a notice through Advocate was sent to the appellant on 25.1.2010 and thereafter consumer complaint was filed before the District Forum alleging that the defective furniture, was sold by the appellant to the complainant/respondent. The appellant herein in reply of the complaint averred that a sum of Rs. 5,000 was paid by the complainant to the appellant in advance and thereafter when furniture was transported to her house, thereafter she paid a sum of Rs. 16,000 which shows that the furniture was appropriate and was as per requirement of the complainant that is why she paid remaining amount of the cost of the furniture. It has also been averred that the allegation of complainant that side box was not sent, is also untrue and the side box was really sent as mentioned in the bill, which was paid by the complainant. There was no defect in the furniture and it was as per need of the complainant and as per the assurance of the appellant.;