- Home
- /
- Consumer Cases
- /
- Hamirpur District Commission Holds...
Hamirpur District Commission Holds Deep Photography Liable For Failure To Deliver Wedding Album
Smita Singh
17 Jun 2024 9:11 PM IST
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hamirpur (Himachal Pradesh) bench of Hemanshu Mishra (President), Sneh Lata (Member) and Joginder Mahajan (Member) held Deep Photography liable for deficiency in services for failure to deliver the wedding album to the Complainants despite receiving a substantial payment. Brief Facts: The Complainants hired Deep Photography as...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hamirpur (Himachal Pradesh) bench of Hemanshu Mishra (President), Sneh Lata (Member) and Joginder Mahajan (Member) held Deep Photography liable for deficiency in services for failure to deliver the wedding album to the Complainants despite receiving a substantial payment.
Brief Facts:
The Complainants hired Deep Photography as a wedding photographer for the marriages of their son and their daughter. The photographer agreed to provide photography services for a total sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- and attended the weddings on January 23, 2022, and January 24, 2022. Prior to these events, the photographer also conducted a pre-wedding video shoot. The Complainants made an initial payment of Rs. 48,000/- through various online transactions and paid an additional Rs. 62,000/- on the wedding day. The photographer delivered the wedding videography to the Complainants and assured them that the photo album would be provided later.
In November 2022, the Complainants contacted the photographer to request the wedding album, but the photographer repeatedly delayed the delivery on various pretexts. The Complainants agreed to pay the remaining balance of Rs. 10,000/- upon receiving the photo album, but the photographer failed to deliver it. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainants approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the photographer.
The photographer didn't appear before the District Commission for the proceedings.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission noted that the photographer did not contest the complaint or appear in response to the notices served. This led to the Complainants' evidence being unrebutted and unchallenged. Given the detailed and convincing nature of the evidence presented by the Complainants, the District Commission found no reason to doubt their claims. Therefore, the District Commission held the photographer liable for deficiency in service.
Recognizing the harassment and financial loss suffered by the Complainants and acknowledging that the emotional impact of losing such irreplaceable memories cannot be quantified in monetary terms, the District Commission is to pay a compensation of Rs. 60,000/- to the Complainants. Further, the District Commission directed the photographer to pay Rs. 10,000 to cover the Complainants' litigation costs.
Case Title: Balbir Singh and Anr. vs Deep Photography
Case Number: 364/2023
Date of Pronouncement: May 17th, 2024