Furniture polishing job turned into a legal battle; Deccan Clap ordered to pay Rs 1.2 lakh to consumer

NEW DELHI: A Delhi consumer court held Deccan Clap-India and its agents responsible for poor service and unfair business practices, after the company allegedly failed to finish painting and furniture polishing work and kept increasing the cost without the customer's approval.What was the disputeThe case was filed by Jatinder Kapoor, who had hired Deccan Clap to paint and polish furniture at his house in Gurugram. After visiting the property in September 2024, the company gave him an estimate of around Rs 1.07 lakh, and Kapoor paid an advance of Rs 10,000.Kapoor said the work did not start on time and moved very slowly. During the process, the company raised the cost estimate more than once. The first revision pushed it around Rs 1.45 lakh, which Kapoor said he agreed to "under duress," paying an additional Rs 40,000 and Rs 20,000.Later, the company raised the cost again, this time to over Rs 2.28 lakh, without even asking him.Kapoor said the painting work only started in the first week of December 2024, but the company stopped the work midway and asked for another increase. When he refused to pay more and asked for a refund instead, and a legal notice he sent went unanswered, he approached the consumer commission.What did the commission observeThe commission found that the company's claim that Kapoor had agreed to the increased estimates was not backed by evidence.

"The documents on record including text messages on the WhatsApp platform, which the complainant has filed with the complaint, did not support the arguments on behalf of the OPs [opposite parties]," the commission said.It also noted that the messages "reveal that on many days the workers did not report to the site for the work and the pace of the work was very slow and lethargic."The commission added that the company's failure to reply to Kapoor's legal notice went against it too, observing that "non-reply to the legal notice appears to be a deemed admission of the allegations of the complainant by the OPs [opposite parties]."The commission said the company hired the sub-contractor to do the work, so there was "a principal-agent relationship" between the company and the worker it had hired. Because of this, the company was held responsible for the payment, though it can later recover its share from the sub-contractor separately.The commission also criticised the company on how they behaved during the case, noting that "the approach of the OP-1 & 2 appears very arrogant and not customer friendly," further pointing out that the company had argued points outside the case and even asked to be reimbursed for travel costs of its representatives attending hearings.The commission ordered Deccan Clap and its associates to refund Rs 70,000 to Kapoor with 9 per cent yearly interest from the date he filed the complaint (March 3, 2025), and to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation for mental harassment and legal costs — both within three weeks. If not paid in time, the amount would attract 12 per cent interest instead.