Seven years on, shop owner gets a dressing down, fine for shortchanging customer
Jay Pachchigar | TNN | Jan 4, 2019, 08:57 IST
VADODARA: The owner of a boutique in Raopura never imagined that unseasonal rain way back in 2010 would come to haunt him seven years later.
The boutique owner has been ordered to compensate a woman, whose expensive Punjabi dress purchased from the shop shrunk when she got wet in the rain. Customer Vaishali Chauhan asked him to replace the dress, but he reneged on the promise. Chauhan moved the consumer court which ordered the boutique to return the cost of the dress with 9% interest.
Chauhan had bought the dress worth Rs 3,500 on November 19, 2010, for a wedding. On the same day, there was a sudden spell of rain and she got drenched. On reaching home, Chauhan realized her dress had shrunk and went to the shop on November 21, 2010. The owner promised to replace it later as they did not have another piece then. The owner had given the visiting card and mentioned the receipt and price on its backside with a promise of replacement.
When the boutique keptdilly-dallied for a month, Chauhan issued them a notice and approached Vadodara District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.
The boutique owner admitted to selling the dress to Chauhan, but argued that he cannot be held responsible for damage due to rain, adding that since the dress manufacturer did not provide another piece, he was not liable for replacement. The boutique also has a display board stating that there is no guarantee for colour, 'jari' and materials of the dress, he stated.
He mentioned about replacement on the visiting card only because Chauhan insisted. However, the forum noted that the circumstances were sufficient to believe that Chauhan was assured of replacement which was denied. It also noted that though the price was Rs 3,500, it was of inferior quality, which is an unfair trade practice.
The boutique owner has been ordered to compensate a woman, whose expensive Punjabi dress purchased from the shop shrunk when she got wet in the rain. Customer Vaishali Chauhan asked him to replace the dress, but he reneged on the promise. Chauhan moved the consumer court which ordered the boutique to return the cost of the dress with 9% interest.
Chauhan had bought the dress worth Rs 3,500 on November 19, 2010, for a wedding. On the same day, there was a sudden spell of rain and she got drenched. On reaching home, Chauhan realized her dress had shrunk and went to the shop on November 21, 2010. The owner promised to replace it later as they did not have another piece then. The owner had given the visiting card and mentioned the receipt and price on its backside with a promise of replacement.
When the boutique keptdilly-dallied for a month, Chauhan issued them a notice and approached Vadodara District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.
The boutique owner admitted to selling the dress to Chauhan, but argued that he cannot be held responsible for damage due to rain, adding that since the dress manufacturer did not provide another piece, he was not liable for replacement. The boutique also has a display board stating that there is no guarantee for colour, 'jari' and materials of the dress, he stated.
He mentioned about replacement on the visiting card only because Chauhan insisted. However, the forum noted that the circumstances were sufficient to believe that Chauhan was assured of replacement which was denied. It also noted that though the price was Rs 3,500, it was of inferior quality, which is an unfair trade practice.
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE