CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions

RADHEY SHYAM vs SNOWHITE DRYCLEANERS

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 6 October 2004 · Citation: 2005 1 CPJ 148

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.D.Kapoor , Rumnita Mittal , Mahesh Chandra J.
RESULT
Appeal dismissed
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 359 words
1.

THE appellant gave five sarees to the respondent for dry cleaning. Four sarees were not dry cleaned to the satisfaction of the appellant while the fifth saree developed some defect during the process of dry cleaning. Four sarees were re-dry cleaned and returned to the appellant and only one saree which developed defect remained with the respondent for dry cleaning. This fact is borne out from the cash memo No. 456 dated 21.6.2001 produced by the appellant.

2.

VIDE impugned order dated 2.7.2004 the District Forum compensated the appellant to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- towards the cost of the said defective saree and Rs. 2,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 1,000/- towards cost of litigation. The grievance of the appellant through this appeal is that the cost of the defective saree was Rs. 20,000/- as it was a wedding saree and, therefore, the appellant has not been adequately compensated. There is no material on record to show as on what date the said saree was purchased and for what amount and how old that saree was. The District Forum on its own assessed the cost of the saree at the relevant time at Rs. 4,000/-. This is such a discretion which should be rarely disturbed.

The object of the Consumer Protection Act is to compensate the consumer for deficiency in service or for unfair trade practice or sale of substandard goods. In the instant case the appellant has been adequately compensated in the absence of any material evidence with regard to the cost for the saree at the time of its purchase. The insistence of the appellant to direct the respondent to return the saree cannot be taken into consideration, as the saree had admittedly been rendered defective during the process of dry cleaning and amount of compensation is towards the cost of the saree as assessed by the District Forum.

3.

APPEAL is highly misconceived and is dismissed. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to record room. APPEAL dismissed.