Date of filing:- 12/03/2021. Date of Order/Judgement:-26/09/2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DIPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
B A R G A R H
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 20 OF 2021
Sri Sumanta Kumar Biswal, S/ol Pancham Biswal, aged about 42(forty two) years, Resident of Nagenpali, Po. Tora, Ps/Tahasil/Dist. Bargarh.
…. …. ... Complainant.
-: V e r s u s :-
(1) The General Manager, SANSUI INDIA HEAD OFFICE, 17th Floor Mittal Court C Wing,
Nariman Paint, Mumbai-400021 (Maharastra).
(2) The Zonal Manager, SANSUI Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 922, Main Road. Radharaman
Colony, Kapila Prasad, Bhubaneswar-751002 (Odisha).
(3) The Proprietor, Sanjaya Sales, Bargarh. At-Goushala Complex, Gandhi Chowk, Bargarh,
Po/Ps/TahasiliDist. Bargarh-768028.
... ..... Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- :- Sri K. Dash, Advocate with Associate.
For the Opposite Party No.1:- :- Ex-parte.
For the Opposite Party No.2:- :- Ex-parte.
For the Opposite Party No.3:- :- Sri Ramesh Pati, Advocate with Associates.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Smt. Jigeesha Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Smt. Anju Agarwal ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.26/09/2023. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Smt. Anju Agarwal, Member (w) :-
- The Case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a bonafide Consumer of Sansui LED TV bearing Model No. SMC40HB21CKF and Sl No. 210116110287605533 on payment of Rs. 27,500/-(Rupees twenty seven thousand five hundred)only cash on Dt. 16/03/2016 under JITNA DOUTNA LO 2015 Scheme and the aforesaid T.V was under the warranty of five years. On Completion of 4 years 11 months of purchase of the product the Consumer is entitled to redemption of the amount and he can purchase the product of the Company with the said redemption amount. When the Complainant approached the Opposite party No.3, the Opposite Party No.3 denied to provide anything. The Opposite Parties are liable to compensate the Complainants for his sufferings besides they are also liable to the redemption value as per the entitlement certificate No. 40SMC006696 which assessed the Compensation to a tune of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand)only from all counts. On Dt. 11/02/2021, a pleaders notice was served but the Opposite parties remained silent.
- The Case of the Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 did not appear before this Commission. Hence Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 are set exparte.
- The Case of the Opposite Party No.3 is that the Opposite Party No.3 was set exparte. On Dt. 20/08/2022 a set aside petition was filed and accordingly the petition was allowed and Opposite Party No.3 filed its version. The Opposite Party No.3 has submitted that the case is not maintainable. The Opposite Party No.3 did not assured regarding the redemption value and he can purchase the product of the Company. The Opposite Party No.3 is not liable for the certificate relied upon, it is the contracted obligation between the Complainant and the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. The Opposite Party No.3 has no knowledge about the terms and conditions of the certification. The Opposite Party No.3 is merely a dealer of Sansui Company and sales the product of the said company. The Opposite Party No.3 has apprised the Complainant the process of lodging complain to get the so called JUDL service from the Opposite party No.1 and 2 but Complain petition revealed that the Complainant has not complied the formality and as such the Complainant has been deprived of getting the service from the Company. Hence, the case is not maintainable against Opposite Party No.3 and liable to be dismissed.
- Perused the Complaint petition, documents and version filed by the parties and following issues are framed:-
ISSUES:-
- Is the Complainant a Consumer of the Opposite Parties ?
- Whether the Opposite Parties have committed unfair trade practice?
- What relief the Complainants is entitled for ?
Issue No.1:-
The Complainant had purchased on Dt. 16/03/2016 one Sansui LED TV bearing Model No. SMC40HB21CKF under JITNA DOUTNA LO 2015 Consumer offer by paying amount of Rs. 27,500/-(Rupees twenty seven thousand five hundred) only from the dealer Opposite Party No.3. The Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 being the manufacturer/service provider of the aforesaid T.V. Hence, the Complainant is the Consumer of the Opposite Parties.
Issue No.2:-
It is an admitted fact that the Complainant on Dt. 16/03/2016 had purchased a Sansui LED TV for Rs. 20,700/-(Rupees twenty thousand seven hundred)only from the Opposite Party No.3 with 5 years warranty. Opposite Party No.3 provided the certificate Dt. 16/03/2016 to the Complainant which is issued by the Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2. As per the JUDL Certificate it is submitted that:-
You are entitled to avail Rs. 20,700/-(Rupees twenty thousand seven hundred)only redepemption on next purchase of any RAIL Limited product on Completion of 4 Years 11 Months from the date of current purchase to be redemmed on WWW. Sansui.India. com of the Company and/ or any other dealer)distributor/website/agent which would be introduced/informed on the official website WWW. Sansui.indian.com from time to time.
The Opposite party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 has offered the rebate of Rs. 20,700/-(Rupees twenty thousand seven hundred)only on purchase of any product of their company after 4 Years 11 Months under the scheme of JITNA DOUTNA LO. When the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party No.3, the Opposite party No.3 has forwarded the Complaint to the Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2.
On the other hand, the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 did not appear before this Commission despite Service of notice and were proceeded exparte. It is also preassumed that the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 having nothing to say in this matter and the allegation mode by the Complainant against Opposite Party No.1 and 2 stands proved.
However, the terms and conditins of the scheme are availed by the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 and for not providing scheme benefits to the Complainant amounts to deficiency in service. For the act conducted by Opposite Party No.1 and 2, Opposite Party No.3 can not be liable.
The issue is answered accordingly.
Issue No.3:-
As discussed supra the Complainant is entitled for relief claimed.
O R D E R
The Complaint is allowed exparte against Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 and dismissed against Opposite Party No.3. The Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite No.2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of Rs. 20,700/-(Rupees twenty thousand seven hundred)only along with intrest @ 9% P.A. from the date of filing the present case i.e. 12/03/2021 till its realization. Further the Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 are also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only along towards cost of litigation of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only to the Complainant within one month of this Order. Failing which the entire Order will carry 12% PA till realization.
Order pronounced in open court on this 26th day of September 2023.
Supply free copies to the parties.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
I agree/-
( Smt. Jigeesha Mishra) (Smt. Anju Agarwal)
Dt.26/09/2023 Dt.26/09/2023
P r e s i d e n t. M e m b e r (w)
