Telangana man orders ‘golden’ sofa legs gets ‘steel-coloured’ ones, wins Rs 25,000 payout

“The opposite party (sofa store) did not attempt to rectify the error committed despite the complainant providing sufficient time for correction. This negligent act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service,” the July 15 order read. 

Noting that the man has been using the sofa since the date of delivery, the commission held that he cannot claim a total refund of the amount paid but directed the store to replace the legs of the subject sofa set with the gold legs as per the order and design agreed at the time of initial booking. 

Customised sofa set with different legs

The complainant claimed that he ordered an L-shape 5-seater sofa from the store on April 30, 2023 and paid an amount of Rs 70,000. The man said that the specifications of the sofa included gold-coloured legs and three pillows during the ordering process.

However, upon delivery on May 28, 2023, the man allegedly found that the sofa deviated from the agreed specifications, and the legs were of steel colour instead of gold, the three pillows ordered were missing, and the lounger size was shorter than what was agreed upon. 

When the complainant allegedly raised a complaint with the store’s salesperson, he was informed that there was a shortage of stock for the gold-coloured legs and pillows, and was assured that they would be replaced. However, despite multiple follow-ups, the replacement has not been provided till date, the man claimed.  The man was represented by advocate V Sai Vamshi in the matter.

‘Issue not resolved yet’

The commission noted that the store admitted in its reply to the legal notice that it was willing to complete the remaining work at its own cost. However, it failed to produce any evidence to show that it had actually carried out the promised rectifications.

“However, after said assurance, the opposite party has not provided any evidence to prove that they have fulfilled their assurance and the complainant’s issue is resolved,” it found.

The commission found that the booking form clearly recorded the agreed specifications, while the WhatsApp chats showed that the complainant had repeatedly followed up and that the store had repeatedly promised to replace the legs and pillows but failed to do so. It concluded that the store had not made any genuine attempt to rectify the defects despite being given sufficient time, amounting to deficiency in service.

The commission, apart from directing the replacement of the sofa, ordered the store to pay Rs 15,000 towards compensation for the mental agony caused and Rs 10,000 towards costs to the complainant within 45 days. 

Store’s defence

Representing the furniture store, advocate P Naveen Kumar argued that the complainant had told the store that he was not particular about the gold-coloured legs or the pillows and was mainly concerned about the quality of the sofa. He further claimed that the complainant paid only Rs 35,000 as an advance initially and settled the remaining amount only after inspecting and accepting the sofa at the time of delivery.

He further alleged that if at all the product is not as per the specifications of the complainant, he would have opposed it at the time of delivery itself, which he has not done, clearly showing his acceptance. The lawyer submitted that having no intention to trouble the complainant, he has assured to take up the pending work, if any, but still he, by suppressing said reply to legal notice, has approached this commission for unlawful gains. 

Takeway

The ruling highlights that retailers must deliver products as promised and cannot indefinitely delay rectifying defects once they have assured consumers that the issues will be resolved.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Telangana: 1800-4250-0333) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.