STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH Date of Institution : 22.09.2022 Reserved on : 09.04.2024 Date of Decision : 19.04.2024 Shri Naina Jewelers, Shop at New Partap Bazar, Rupnagar, Prop.

Sanjay Nagi since deceased now through his LRs:-

1. Vivek Nagi son of Late Sanjay Nagi now Prop. Of Shri Naina Jewelers Shop at New Partap Bazar, Rupnagar, R/o House No.6731, Hargobind Nagar, Street No.2-A, Tehsil and District Rupnagar.

……..Appellant/Complainant Versus Baljinder Singh aged about 56 years son of Rattan Singh, resident of House No.5814, Sukhrampur Tapprian, Tehsil and District Rupnagar.

…..Respondent/Opposite Party Appeal under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to challenge the order dated 25.04.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar in C.C. No.69 of 2021.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Present:-

For the Appellant : Sh. Abhishek Singla, Advocate For the Respondent : Sh. Kulwinder Singh, Advocate

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT:-

The Appellant/OP i.e. Shri Naina Jewellers, Prop. Sanjay Nagi since deceased has filed the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the ‘Act’) through his LR Vivek Nagi, being aggrieved by the order dated 25.04.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar in C.C. No.69 of 2021 whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent/Complainant had been allowed.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Complainant in the Complaint filed before the District Commission which are necessary for disposal of the present Appeal are that he had paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to the Proprietor of Shri Naina Jewellers namely Sanjay Nagi to prepare the gold ornaments on the eve of marriage of his son and an assurance was given to prepare the ornaments within a period of 4-5 months in presence of his son Vivek Nagi. However, said Sanjay Nagi had expired and his son namely Vivek Nagi was the beneficiary of the said jewelers shop, which was left by Sanjay Nagi. Thereafter, Vivek Nagi became the proprietor of the said shop. After a period of 4-5 months, the Complainant had approached the proprietor of the shop Vivek Nagi, but he refused to make gold ornaments and also to return the amount. The Complaint was filed by the Complainant with the prayer to pay claim amount of Rs.2,50,000/- alongwith interest @12% per annum from the date of receiving the amount till its realization or to prepare jewelery as per the rate of gold in the month of September, 2019. Further to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental agony and unnecessary harassment to the Complainant and also to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation by filing the Complaint.

3. Notice was issued in the Complaint but inspite of service, OP did not appear and ultimately he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 21.02.2022 as he did not appear before the District Commission inspite of service.

4. After hearing the oral arguments of learned Counsel for the Complainant, the Complaint was decided at the back of the OP as he was exparte. The relevant part of the order passed as mentioned in para No.5 is reproduced as under :-

“5. So after considering all the facts, the present complaint is allowed against OP. OP is directed to pay full payment to complainant Rs.2,50,000/- alongwith litigation expenses Rs.10,000/- and for mental agony Rs.15,000/-. However, if the OP fails to make the payment within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order he will be liable to pay 6% per annum interest on the decretal amount till its payment. The OP is further directed to comply with the above said order within 30 days from the date of receiving of copy of this order. Fr