‘Go To Court’ Attitude Costs Retailer: IHA Designs Directed To Refund And Compensate For Defective Saree
Pranav B Prem
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam, comprising Shri D.B. Binu (President), Shri V. Ramachandran (Member), and Smt. Sreevidhia T.N (Member), has held IHA Designs Pvt. Ltd. and its manager, Nooha Sajeev, liable for selling a defective saree that caused visible discoloration during a significant family occasion. The Commission found the conduct of the opposite parties to be not only a clear case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice but also reflective of gross indifference and unprofessionalism.
The complainant, Mr. Joseph Niclavose, had purchased 14 sarees worth ₹89,199/- from IHA Designs, influenced by the seller’s marketing representations promising premium craftsmanship and curated collections. The sarees were intended for his wife and other family members for his sister-in-law’s engagement function held on January 21, 2024. Among the purchases was a pink saree priced at ₹16,500/-, which his wife wore on the day of the event. To their dismay, the saree began to bleed colour on contact with the skin, causing visible discoloration that led to significant embarrassment and emotional distress in the presence of friends and relatives.
The following day, the complainant and his wife approached IHA Designs to report the issue. However, they were met with rude and dismissive behaviour, with no offer of refund or replacement. The complainant followed up with emails dated January 22 and January 24, 2024, and later served a legal notice dated February 21, 2024, which was acknowledged by the opposite parties. Despite these repeated efforts, there was no response or attempt to resolve the matter. When contacted telephonically, the complainant was reportedly told to "go to court."
Left with no recourse, the complainant filed a complaint before the Ernakulam District Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Though the opposite parties entered appearance on May 15, 2024, they failed to file their version or appear thereafter and were consequently proceeded ex parte.
The Commission, after considering the evidence submitted—including the purchase bill, invitation card, photographs showing discoloration, and the saree itself as a material exhibit—found merit in the complainant's case. Upon visual inspection of the saree, the Commission confirmed that the discoloration was clearly visible. It held that the sale of a defective product and the failure to address a consumer grievance despite multiple opportunities constituted a serious deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice under Sections 2(11) and 2(47) of the Act.
The Commission emphasized that sellers and service providers have an obligation not just to sell products of promised quality but also to redress post-sale complaints with sincerity and promptness. It noted that consumer satisfaction does not end with the sale and that ignoring complaints reflects a lack of accountability. The failure of the opposite parties to respond to the legal notice and participate in the proceedings was deemed an implied admission of the allegations.
Highlighting the emotional distress caused during an important family celebration, the Commission observed that the incident went beyond a mere financial dispute. The saree was purchased with pride and worn with anticipation, and its failure marred a moment meant to be cherished. The Commission strongly criticized the opposite parties’ dismissive attitude, noting that the remark “Go to court” reflected a disregard for consumer dignity and responsibility.
In its final order pronounced on June 26, 2025, the Commission directed IHA Designs and its manager, jointly and severally, to:
Refund ₹16,500/- to the complainant, being the cost of the defective saree.
Pay ₹15,000/- as compensation for emotional distress and mental agony.
Pay ₹5,000/- as costs of the proceedings.
The Commission also stated that failure to comply with the payment directions within 45 days from receipt of the order would attract interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint (April 12, 2024) until the date of full realization.
Appearance
Complainant: Adv. Alvin Jewel.S.S
Opposite Parties: Adv. Dileep Rahman, Raji.s, Ayisha Navas
Cause Title: Mr. Joseph Niclavose V. IHA Designs Pvt. Ltd
Case No: CC.No. 415 of2024
Coram: Shri D.B. Binu [President], Shri V. Ramachandran [Member], Smt. Sreevidhia T.N [Member]
