The court's decision was influenced by the evidence that the Saree was not received for dry cleaning but for 'Charak' only, as indicated in the Cash Memo.

Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President— Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that appellant had given some clothes including a Saree for dry-cleaning to the Opposite Party (O.P.). When he went to collect the same he found that the Saree had not been properly drycleaned and on the contrary it had been badly damaged. When he complained he was insulted. He sent a legal notice claiming Rs. 5,000/- as damages. This was followed by a complainant in the District Forum.

2. The plea of the O.P. was that only one Saree as distinguished from several clothes was given but that too not for dry-cleaning but only for special pressing called ‘Charak’. It was stated. that the complaint be dismissed for suppression of material facts. It was further stated that the complainant was not satisfied with the ‘Charak’ carried out by the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party, therefore, offered not to charge Rs. 4/- which had been agreed as ‘Charak’ charges. After hearing both the parties, the District Forum dismissed the complaint and imposed costs of Rs. 200/- on the complainant.

3. Aggrieved by the order, the complainant has preferred this appeal. The appellant contended that he was not only insulted but abused and man-handled when he raised the objection regarding the damage caused to the Saree. Assuming that the allegations regarding abusing and man-handling are true, the complainant could have his remedy according to law by making an appropriate complaint before a Magistrate.

4. We have seen the carbon copy of Cash Memo No. 3717 dated 24.9.91 where in the column ment for the amount, the figure mentioned is Rs. 4/-. This lends support to the statement of the OP. that the Saree had not been received for dry cleaning but for ‘Charak’ only. After careful consideration and for the reasons mentioned above, we find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. We leave the parties to bear their own costs in the appeal only.

Appeal dismissed.