CONSUMER RIGHTS
Tailor-made relief
Pushpa Girimaji

Come festivals and weddings and tailors are in great demand. But cutting and stitching Indian dresses is an art, and not every tailor is good at it. As a result, there are a number of complaints against tailors.

In fact, ever since the Consumer Protection (CP) Act came into being, customers have taken tailors to court for failing to stitch as per specifications, or, in other words, for providing deficient service. In some cases, they got help from courts and also compensation for the harassment undergone.

While most of these cases were decided by the courts at the district level, one particular case went up to the national level — before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission — and the decision of the apex court in this case is an important one from the point of view of consumers as it decided once for all, the issue of whether tailors could be prosecuted under the consumer protection law.

Here the main issue was whether the services provided by a tailor fall into the category of 'personal service' or professional service'. Personal service is outside the purview of courts but not professional service, which is rendered for a fee.

To put it differently, the Consumer Protection Act gives the consumer the right to seek compensation against deficient services. Under the Act, the definition of service is so wide that it includes all services except those rendered free of charge and those rendered under a contract of personal service. Now in this particular case, the tailor's argument was that the service rendered by tailors came under the category of ‘personal service’ and, therefore, was excluded from the jurisdiction of courts.

The facts leading to the case were quite simple. Mr A.C. Modagi, the consumer in this case, had given a pair of pants for stitching to Cross Well Tailors.

On the date of delivery, he paid Rs 75 towards tailoring charges and collected the garment. However, he was most distressed when he tried it on because it was tight and shapeless and, in short, unfit for wearing. He gave it for alterations but found that the tailor's attempts to make these did not make any difference to the pair of pants. Upset over this turn of events, he demanded that the tailor return the cost of the fabric and the stitching charges, but the tailor refused to oblige.

The district forum, before which the consumer filed a complaint, directed the tailor to pay him Rs 365(the cost of the fabric plus tailoring charges) and also Rs 200 as damages and Rs 100 towards the cost of litigation. It also ordered that an interest of 12 per cent be paid on this entire amount from the date of the complaint till the date of payment of the amount.

The state redressal commission, before which the tailor appealed, set aside the order on the ground that the complaint was not maintainable under the CP Act as the service rendered by the tailor was a ’personal service’ coming under the exclusion clause.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, however, set aside this order and restored that of the district forum. While doing so, it observed that a ’personal service’ pertained to a master and servant relationship, which was totally different from a lawyer-client relationship, or, for that matter, a tailor-client relationship.

Unlike in a master-servant relationship, here, the tailor was independent of any supervision or control of the consumer while he was cutting the cloth or stitching it. While doing his work, the tailor was bound to obey the direction given by the consumer about the design. Thus, the service rendered by the tailor was a professional service and not a personal one, the apex court held.

It also pointed out that the state commission was wrong in describing the charges or fee paid to the tailor by the consumer as ‘wages’. "A tailor charges a sum for the stitching work done by him. He is not paid the amount as wages", the court clarified (Sri A.C. Modagi vs Cross Well Tailor and Others, revision petition no 75 of 1990).

In other words, a consumer who gets clothes stitched from a tailor can take him to court for deficient service. This includes not just bad cutting or stitching but also for not following the design or the pattern given by the consumer.

HOME