SEEMATTI Vs. GEETHA MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party in O. P. No.778/93 on the file of the District Forum, Kottayam is the appellant.

(2.) The respondent herein who is the complainant purchased one saree from opposite party on 18.12.1992. It is her case that when she took the saree to wear, it was found that the saree was damaged. Immediately she telephoned to opposite party, but they were not prepared to replace the saree. She could not immediately trace out the bill and she thought that it was lost. However, later it could be traced out. She again contacted the opposite party over the phone and asked them to replace the saree. She also told that she could trace out the bill. Thereafter she took the saree to opposite party and gave a Photostat copy of the said bill. However the opposite party was not prepared to replace the saree or to refund the price of the saree. It is in those circumstances the complaint was filed.

(3.) The opposite party filed version stating that it has been specifically mentioned in the bill that if there is any complaint that would be brought to the notice of the opposite party within 30 days and any claim made thereafter will not be entertained.