Delhi Consumer Court Orders Deccan Clap to Refund Rs 70,000 for Poor Service
Consumer Court Orders Deccan Clap to Refund Rs 70,000

A Delhi consumer court has held Deccan Clap-India and its agents responsible for poor service and unfair business practices. The company allegedly failed to complete painting and furniture polishing work while repeatedly increasing the cost without the customer's consent.

Details of the Dispute

The case was filed by Jatinder Kapoor, who had hired Deccan Clap to paint and polish furniture at his Gurugram residence. After visiting the property in September 2024, the company provided an estimate of approximately Rs 1.07 lakh, and Kapoor paid an advance of Rs 10,000.

According to Kapoor, the work did not commence on time and progressed very slowly. During the process, the company revised the cost estimate multiple times. The first revision increased it to around Rs 1.45 lakh, which Kapoor stated he agreed to under duress, paying an additional Rs 40,000 and Rs 20,000.

Wide Pickt banner — collaborative shopping lists app for Telegram, phone mockup with grocery list

Subsequently, the company raised the cost again, this time to over Rs 2.28 lakh, without even consulting him. Kapoor said painting work only began in the first week of December 2024, but the company stopped midway and demanded another increase. When he refused to pay more and requested a refund, his legal notice went unanswered, prompting him to approach the consumer commission.

Commission's Observations

The commission found that the company's claim that Kapoor had agreed to the increased estimates was not supported by evidence. The documents on record, including text messages on WhatsApp, did not back the arguments of the opposite parties. The commission also noted that the messages revealed that workers often did not report to the site, and the pace of work was very slow and lethargic.

Furthermore, the commission observed that the company's failure to reply to Kapoor's legal notice counted against it, as non-reply appeared to be a deemed admission of the allegations. The commission stated that the company had hired a sub-contractor, creating a principal-agent relationship, making the company responsible for payment, though it could later recover its share from the sub-contractor separately.

The commission criticized the company's conduct during the case, noting that their approach appeared arrogant and not customer-friendly. It pointed out that the company argued points outside the case and even sought reimbursement for travel costs of its representatives attending hearings.

Order and Compensation

The commission ordered Deccan Clap and its associates to refund Rs 70,000 to Kapoor with 9 percent yearly interest from the date of filing the complaint (March 3, 2025). Additionally, they must pay Rs 50,000 as compensation for mental harassment and legal costs, both within three weeks. If not paid in time, the amount will attract 12 percent interest instead.

Pickt after-article banner — collaborative shopping lists app with family illustration