| Font Size |
The advocate had filed a petition seeking directions to Punjab Government for filling the vacant posts of presidents and members in various District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forums, the recommendations for which had been sent by the Statutory Committee to the State Government.
During the course of the hearing, the State had raised a contention that the appointments of some of the members and presidents of the said forums were not proper, and after examining the records of the selection, the Court, with the consent of the Punjab law officer, had disposed of the petition on November 1, 2007.
The Court had then observed that the newly appointed chairman of the Punjab State Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, Justice S N Aggarwal, would re-examine all the selections, and give recommendations, which would be binding on the State.
Three-and-a-half months have lapsed since then, but no appointments have been made by the State so far. The advocate alleged that even though Justice S N Aggarwal had reviewed the selection and submitted his reports to the Food and Supplies Minister last year in November, the State has failed to clear the recommended appointments.
The posts of president, District Forum, Nawanshahar, has been lying vacant since March 7, 2007; that of District Forum, Ferozepur is lying vacant since April 19, 2007 and that of District Forum, Gurdaspur, is vacant since April 13, 2007. Likewise, the post of one lady member is lying vacant at District Forum, Mansa, since January 3, 2007. Besides, the posts of lady members in district forums at Gurdaspur, Moga and Sangrur have been lying vacant since June 2, June 30 and June 2, 2007 respectively.
District Forum’s decision upheld
THE State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, justifying the decision of District Consumer Disputes Forum, has directed D K Vision, Sector 8, to pay Rs 15,000 compensation to a city resident for unfair trade practices.
M S Kohli, the complainant, had visited D K Visions to buy a TV. Kohli was shown a Samsung 29” TV set manufactured by Samsung India, costing around Rs19,000. He was also told that a DVD player, one sure short scratch card, one travel bag, a pair of wrist watch, one gift cheque worth Rs 2,100, an extended 1+2 warranty and a zero per cent finance facility would be made available.
After the legal formalities and paying the relevant amount, when Kohli visited the showroom to collect the free gift cheque of Rs 2,100, he found that the same could only be used at M M Jewellers diamond shop, Sector 10, Chandigarh. Further, Kohli found out at the jewellers that the minimum cost of any item there was Rs12,000.
Deciding the case, the Commission declared that the decision taken by the Forum was absolutely correct as the dealers had attempted to mislead the customer. The misrepresentation on part of the appellant was that it had charged Rs 3,000 for the DVD player and could not prove that it was worth Rs 6,000 or had given it as a combined offer.
The Forum held that the gift voucher for purchase of jewellery was of no consequence unless Kohli bought something from the jewellers. This shows that the appellant had adopted unfair trade practice in promoting the business of M M Jewellers by compelling the purchaser to shop for jewellery items too. Hence the appeal was dismissed.
Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|