Six months before the date of her marriage, Nerul resident Neha Karangutkar had hired the services of a wedding photography firm for the wedding and haldi ceremonies that were to take place in March 2019. She had even hired a private yacht from the Gateway of India for her pre-wedding shoot planned at a location in Arabian Sea. However, half of her pre-wedding photoshoot pictures got corrupted due to a software issue faced by the firm. Accordingly, a consumer commission early this month ordered the Andheri firm to refund her Rs 50,000.
The commission also ordered that Confetti Films pay her compensation and litigation costs of Rs 5,000 and Rs 2,000 respectively. The unhappy bride had complained that as per the terms of the contract, the firm was supposed to provide her with raw pictures as well as edited photos and videos with the highest resolution. She said because of its negligence, the software files of the photos of the pre-wedding shoot got corrupted. She was not happy with the remaining photos either, as they were poor resolution, besides being unedited. She said after her email correspondence, the firm had agreed to pay her Rs 56,000 of the Rs. 74,000 she had paid it, but the refund never came.
The firm did not appear before the commission despite notice and hence the complainant’s version went unchallenged. The commission, however, noted that she had not come before it with clean hands, as the emails she produced as proof did not contain the entire trail and contained only her replies. It did not believe her complaint that the photos were not edited and of poor resolution, as she had not attached a single photo to support her allegations.
It decided, though, that as the emails showed that the firm had assured a refund and apparently not done as promised, that they had been deficient in service and indulged in unfair trade practice. Commission member Preeti Chamikutty opined that it was due to the firm’s fault that half of Karangutkar’s pre-wedding photos got corrupted. To the extent of the photos that got corrupted, it held that the firm was liable to pay a certain sum to the complainant.
(To receive our E-paper on whatsapp daily, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper’s PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)
Published on: Monday, February 14, 2022, 07:22 PM IST