K.C.TAYAL vs JAndK INDUSTRIES LTD.

THE appeal has been filed by the complainant against the order of the District Forum, Delhi, dated 7th May, 1992 dismissing the complaint.

BRIEFLY the facts are that the complainant purchased one silk Saree from the Opp. Party on 6th May, 1990 for an amount of Rs. 465.60 (price Rs. 452/-, sales tax Rs. 13.60) vide Cash memo No. 2712 dated ''Nil''. It is alleged by the complainant that the quality of the Saree was very poor and it could not be worth more than Rs. 230/-. Consequently, he filed a complaint against the Opp. Party for appropriate relief before the District Forum. The Opp. Party contested the claim and pleaded that the complainant purchased two Sarees of the value of Rs. 452/- and not one as stated by him. The learned District Forum held that the complainant purchased two Sarees. Consequently it dismissed the complaint with costs. He has come up in appeal against the order of the District Forum to this Commission.

The complainant has produced the Cash Memo which contains 6 columns namely (1) S.No. (2) Particulars (3) Quantity (4) Meters Cmt. (5) Rate (6) Amount. In the Cash Memo in dispute the sales girl made entry only in 3 columns namely Column No. 2, Column No. 4 and Column No. 6. No entry was made by her in Column Nos. 1, 3 & 5. In Column Nos. 2, 4 & 6 the details of the purchase are given as follows :- (2) Particulars ''Ptd Saree'' (4) Meter-Cmt. ''5-50 Mts (6) Amount Rs. 452/-. To the Sale price of Rs. 452/-, Sales Tax @ 3% amounting to Rs. 13.60 was added at the end of the bill. It is common knowledge that the sarees are sold by numbers and the items of cloth which are, to be cut from rolls of cloth, by meters. While preparing a bill for sale of Sarees, length of Saree is not mentioned in the Cash memo but number of Sarees rate of each Saree and the total amount is mentioned therein. The sale person in this case adopted a novel method of filling the columns of the Cash Memo. The words in the column of particulars are 5-50 metered. The last word has been written in abbreviated form and cannot be read as ''each'' by any literate person. It appears that price of the Saree was quoted as Rs. 452/- instead of Rs. 256/- by the sales girl and while preparing the Cash Memo. This way was devised by her to cheat the Complainant. She successfully duped the Complainant at the time of sale and in the evening she corrected the duplicate copy of the Cash Memo and mentioned therein two Sarees in column No. 3 of the bill. The story put forth by the Opp. Party is not plausible and consequently we find no substance therein.

THE learned District Forum laid some emphasis on the Phraseology used by the complainant in the complaint which reads as follows :- "I have purchased one silk Saree as per enclosed Cash Memo... against Cash payment of Rs. 465.60. THE quality, quantity and rates columns are blank. THE printed Sarees had been given to me is a of poor quality Saree and I feel that its cost may not exceed Rs. 230/-."

THE learned Forum inferred from the words ''printed Sarees'' that two Sarees were sold to the complainant. It is a settled principle of law that a plaint has to be read as a whole and not in parts. It the plaint is read as a whole, it is clear that only one Saree was sold to the complainant. THE word ''Sarees'' is a typing mistake committed by the Steno and the complainant inadvertantly signed the complaint. THE complainant is a highly educated person and working as a Deputy Director, National Maleria Eradication Programme. THE language of the sentence marked as ''A'' above is faulty and it is not expected from the complainant that he would not have corrected It, if he had read the complaint carefully. Therefore, the Opp. Party cannot derive any benefIt from the language of the complaint. It is sad that the consumer does not get fair deal even in shops run by the Government. In our view the complainant is also entItled to exemplary damages from the Opp. Party which we assess at Rs. 500/-. The Opp. Party can fix the responsibilIty and deduct the amount of the decree from the salary of the person found guilty.

FOR the aforesaid reasons we accept the appeal with costs and direct the Opp. Party to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs. 226/- on account of the price of the Saree and pay to him Rs. 500/- as damages. Costs Rs. 250/-. The Opp. Party is directed to pay the aforesaid amount to the complainant within a period of three months from the date of the order, otherwise action would be taken against them under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Appeal allowed with costs. _______________