DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KHURDA, BHUBANESWAR:
-oo0oo-
C.C.CASE NO. 383/ 2016
Dipti Ranjan Mohapatra, aged about 38 years,
S/o- Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra, Plot No.4295/ 4772, Pandab Nagar,
Tankapani Road, Bhubaneswar, Dist - Khurda
…. Complainant
-Vrs.-
- Payal Enterprise, (Authorized Franchise of EUREKA FORBES),
Plot No.197/3276, Trilochan Vihar, Sundarpada,
Bhubaneswar – 751002, Dist- Khurda, through its Proprietor
- EUREKA FORBES LTD., Branch Office At- Ground Floor,
Bharati Tower, A- Block, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar-751009,
Through its Branch Head/ Authorized Signatory.
…. Opp. Parties
For the complainant : Mr. K.C.Prusty (Adv.)
For the OPs : Exparte
DATE OF FILING : 13/10/2016
DATE OF ORDER : 20/11/2023
ORDER
K.C.RATH, PRESIDENT
1. This is an application U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
2. The complainant’s case in brief is that, he had purchased one aqua guard (Classic Model) from OP.1 on 11/11/2015. He paid Rs.8990/- as consideration thereof. The said aqua guard was covered under warranty for a period of 12 months from the date of its purchase. Aqua guard purchased by the complainant was found defective. He approached the OP.1 who instructed the OP.2 to replace the defective aqua guard with a new one. But the OP.2 did not respond. Both the OPs 1 & 2 remained silent over the matter. Hence this complaint.
3. On the other hand, the OPs were set exparte and exparte hearing was taken up on 19/10/2023.
4 Perused the materials on record. Admittedly, the complainant purchased a classic model aqua guard from the OP.1 and paid Rs.8990/- for it. It is alleged by the complainant that the product was defective. But the allegation that the aqua guard in question was a defective product, has not been proved before this Commission in proper way. When there is allegation before this Commission that the product is defective, it must be sent to the appropriate laboratory for testing. But no such test has been done in this case. Therefore, it is pre-mature to hold that the aqua guard purchased by the complainant was a defective one. However, some letters addressed to the President, District Consumer Disputes Redressed Forum, Khurda by the Accounts Officer, Ureka Forbes Ltd., indicate that the OP.2 was taking steps to resolve the problem. But as alleged by the OP.2 that, the complainant and the members of his family are not cooperating the OP.1 in resolving the problem. However, considering the facts & circumstances of the case in entirety, this Commission feels appropriate to dispose of the matter in the following manner. Hence it is ordered.
ORDER
The complaint is allowed in part exparte against the OPs. The complainant or in his absence, the members of his family, should give intimation to the OP.1 fixing the date & time about their availability at home and OP.1 should do well to depute his service person to the house of the complainant to check the aqua guard and to remove the defects if possible and in case, if removal of the defects is not possible, then the OPs are directed to replace it with a new one of the same price/ model. The entire process indicated above should be completed within four months from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order against the OPs in accordance with law. No order as to cost & compensation.
The order is pronounced on this day the 20th November, 2023 under the seal & signature of the President and Member (W) of the Commission.
(K.C.RATH)
PRESIDENT
Dictated & corrected by me
President
I agree
(S.Tripathy)
Member (W)
Transcribed by Smt. M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno
