Orissa

Cuttak

CC/94/2020

Geetarani Senapaty - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amit Gupta,S M Electrical Corporaton - Opp.Party(s)

P K Muduli

21 Jul 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                                C.C.No.94/2020

Gitarani Senapaty,

W/O:Biranchi Narayan Senapaty,

At:Nuapatna,P.O/P.S:Mangalabag,

Dist:Cuttack-753001.                                                                                     ... Complainant.

        

                                                Vrs.

1.       Amit Gupta-Proprietor,

M/s. S.M.Electrical Corporation,

In front of Picture House, (side of Amareswar Temple),

Near Fire Station,P.O:Buxibazar(G.P.O),

Dist:Cuttack-753001(Odisha).

 

2.      CINNI Electricals & Appliances,

C-21/85,Mahamandal Nagar,Lahurabir,

Opp. Chetaganj Thana,

Varanasi-221001....Opp. Parties.

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    17.11.2020

Date of Order:  21.07.2022

 

For the complainant:            Mr.P.K.Muduli,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.               :                        None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                         

            Case of the complainant in short is that she had purchased a Cinni Table Fan on 23.2.19 from the O.Ps for a consideration of Rs.2300/- but had not been issued the cash bill.  Only one warranty card was issued reflecting warranty period against manufacturing defect for 24 months from the date of purchase for repairing or replacement free of charge the fan or its components.  The fan developed problems on 9.8.19, 13.8.19, 19.9.19, 3.10.19 and ultimately on 21.10.20. But the O.Ps had not repaired the same for which the complainant had issued legal notice to them and ultimately had filed this case with a prayer to get refund of Rs.2300/- alongwith compensation of Rs.20,000/- from the O.Ps.

2.         Having not contested this case, both the O.Ps were set exparte.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

            i.          Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps?

            ii.         Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her?

Point No.1.

            From the unchallenged contents of the complaint petition, it is understood that the Cinni Table Fan that which was purchased by the complainant from the O.Ps had developed certain problems which was not repaired by the O.Ps inspite of persisting warranty.  Thus there was definitely deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

Point No.2.

            From the above discussions, it is concluded here that the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as sought for.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                         ORDER

            The case is decreed exparte against both the O.Ps who are held jointly and severally liable.  The O.Ps are thus directed to refund the complainant the price of the Cinni Table Fan to the tune of Rs.2300/- and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 21^st day of July,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.

                                                                                                                               Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                                                                                                                                                               Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                Member