Date of Filing             : 04-03-2009

                                                            Date of Order            : 15-06-2009

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                C.C.No.66/09

                                    Dated this, the 15^th day of June 2009.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                                : MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI                          : MEMBER

Manjunath Kamath.M.

R/at Near SAT High School,                       } Complainant

Manjeshwar of Kasaragod Taluk.

(Adv. C.Damodharan, Kasaragod)

Angel Techno Services Pvt.Ltd,                       } Opposite party

TP 418 P/R KTP Building, South

Bazar, Kannur.

(Exparte)

                                                            O R D E R

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT

            The case of the complainant in brief is that the Panasonic brand TV he purchased  became defective during its warranty period and he entrusted it for repair with opposite party on 05-05-07.  Opposite party repaired and delivered it on 14-06-2007.  Since the repair was defective he could not get the benefit of the repair.  The defect recurred on 23-11-2007 and on 29-12-07.   On these occasions also opposite party repaired the TV.  During first week of  April 2008 TV again went wrong.  Hence not satisfied with the repair work of opposite party complainant engaged another authorized repairer.  According to the said repairer the defect were recurred  due to fixing duplicate spare parts by opposite party and the TV set  became damaged irreparably.

2.        The complainant could get Rs.500/- only for the defective  old TV and he purchased a new TV for Rs.12,000/-.  Due to the delay and defective repair of TV by opposite party  the complainant suffered mental agony and therefore the complaint.

3.        Opposite party remained absent inspite of receipt of notice issued by registered post.  Hence opposite party set exparte. Complainant filed affidavit in lieu of oral evidence.  Exts A1 to A11 marked.  Counsel for the complainant heard.

4.        The recurrence of the defect of the TV repaired by the opposite party during short intervals the deficient nature of service of the opposite party.  There is no contra evidence to show that the defect of the TV was repeated due to any other reasons.

Therefore complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation to the complainant for the improper service rendered to the complainant with a cost of Rs.2500/-.  Time for compliance 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.

     Sd/-                                                         Sd/-                                       Sd/-

 MEMBER                                                      MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Exts.

A1.13-03-04 Cash bill

A2. 05-05-07 Indoor Job sheet

A3.23-11-07  Job sheet

A4. 16-6-07 letter sent by complainant to opposite party

A5. 29-06-07 letter sent by complainant to opposite party

A6.  14-07-07 letter sent by complainant to opposite party

A7.14-11-07 letter sent by complainant to opposite party

A8 28-03-08 letter sent by complainant to opposite party

A9.  08-05-09 ,,                                                 ,,

A10.13-6-08 copy of lawyer notice.

A11.Postal acknowledgement card.

Sd/-                                                               Sd/-                                      Sd/-

MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Pj/                                                                                Forwarded by order

                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT