Kerala store ‘refuses’ refund for son’s ill-fitting school uniform, father wins payout

The commission directed the store to refund the amount paid for the school uniform and pay Rs 2,000 towards compensation to the man.

school uniform pants Clothing store rs 2599The commission found that the store admitted that the man purchase the school uniform pants and they offered an exchange but he was not interested in purchasing another. (AI-generated image)

A Kerala consumer commission held a clothing store deficient in service after it refused to refund the price of a pair of school uniform pants that did not fit the complainant’s son, despite the salesman allegedly assuring him that it could be returned if the size was unsuitable. The commission directed the store to refund Rs 599 and pay Rs 2,000 towards compensation and litigation costs.

President P V Jayarajan, along with members Preetha G Nair and Viju V R, was hearing the complaint filed by a man who bought black school uniform pants for his son, which he later found did not fit when tried at home.

“As the mental agony and financial loss to the complainant was caused due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party (store), we find that the opposite party is liable to compensate the loss sustained by the complainant. In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in favour of the complainant,” the July 20 order read. 

Story continues below this ad

Pants did not fit

The man claimed that he purchased a readymade black school uniform pants from the store, but when his son tried it over the clothes he was already wearing at the shop, they did not fit properly. According to the man, the salesman informed them that since the pants were tried on over the existing clothes, its fitting could not be accurately assessed.

The salesman allegedly advised them to try the pants properly at home and assured them that if the size was not correct, it could be returned and exchanged.

Believing the assurance given by the store, the complainant paid the price and purchased the pants. However, when his son tried the pants at home, the size was allegedly found to be unsuitable.

The complainant claimed that when he requested a refund, the store refused and instead asked him to purchase another item from the shop. He allegedly told the store that he did not require any other item and sought only a refund, but the store declined to return the money. Aggrieved, he moved the commission alleging deficiency in service.

Story continues below this ad

Noting that the store had not produced any evidence to prove its arguments, the commission found that the store admitted that the purchase of school uniform pants offered an exchange, and the complainant was not interested in purchasing another. 

Finding the store deficient in service, the commission directed the store to refund Rs 599, pay Rs 1,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 1,000 towards litigation costs, within one month. 

Store’s defence

The store, represented by advocate Sandeep T George, argued that the complainant, attracted by the great discounts being offered by the said society, had, after thorough inspection of the readymade pants, purchased the same. It was added that before selecting the pants, his son wore the same over the existing pants, and the man was fully satisfied with the size of the same. 

The store claimed that the complainant’s allegation that the salesman had offered a refund if the same was returned due to any problem with the size was wrong. It was also submitted that the salesman had informed the complainant that there was no refund and that he could take the next size product or any other products of the same value. 

Story continues below this ad

Takeaway

The ruling highlights that when a seller assures a customer that an item can be returned or exchanged if it does not fit, the assurance can be relevant in determining whether refusal to honour it amounts to deficiency in service.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and Union territories (Kerala: 1800-425-1550) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance. 

Don’t miss out on these stories

Events firm ‘quits’ amid bride’s pre-wedding functions, father wins Rs 6.7 lakh payout

Policy cancelled over ‘hypertension’, insurer ordered to restore it, pay Rs 1.10 lakh

Story continues below this ad

Kerala man wins Rs 1.36 lakh payout after missing connecting flight to Riyadh

Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express (Digital), where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More

 

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments