SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT

           Complainant filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, for getting an order directing opposite party to return Rs.28,000/-  which is the amount received by the opposite party for installing the defective water purifier system and to pay Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings of this case.  

            Brief facts of complainant’s case is that by believing the words, offers, and advertisement made by the OP, on 1^st December 2022, complainant installed his water purification system.  An amount of Rs.28,000/- was received by the OP towards the price of water purifier system.  OP had offered 12 months warranty for his product.  Apart from that the OP compelled to the complainant to install a new water tank for his water purifier system and accordingly complainant had to purchase a new water tank by spending Rs.7850/-.  As per instruction of the OP, complainant has replaced almost all water taps of his house before installing water purification system.  Within few months of installation the complainant came to know that above system was not working in proper manner and is a defective one.  Complainant noticed the mud paste in the inner walls of water tank, and new water taps are stained due to the flow of mud water.  Since water purifier system was not working in a proper manner, muddy water was stored in water tank and there by caused unusual taste and foul smell of water.  Though the complainant informed the OP regarding the above defects of his water purifier system and the alleged problems, the OP did not taken any steps to cure the same, several times, service requests were made by the complainant which was not responded by the OP.  The complainant has conducted a water quality test after installing the water purifier system. From that test also the water purification system was total failure.  Subsequently  on 29/09/2023 the complainant sent a registered lawyer notice to the OP intimating the defects of the water purifier system and also requested him to return the amount which was received in the name of installation of the water purifier system.  The notice issued to the OP was returned as ‘Refused’.  He has sustained huge financial loss due to the OP’s unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.  The OP willfully refused the notice in order to escape from the legal liability.  Hence this complaint.  

            After receiving notice, OP filed written version denying the allegations of the complainant.   According to OP complainant has not fulfilled all the requirements as suggested by OP. That is why the filtering process was not working properly.  OP further submitted that he has supplied and installed the vessel filter to complainant’s house as per the complainant’s instruction.  The vessel filter was a defect free one and he had done necessary services to the complainant.  OP contended that there is no deficiency in service on his part.

            While the case is pending, complainant had taken steps to appoint an expert commissioner to inspect the product in dispute and to prepare a report.  As per   the application, Assistant Engineer, Kerala Water authority, Kannur was appointed as Expert commissioner and directed him to inspect the defects if any of water purification system and filed a detailed report as per the work memo of parties.  The expert appointed has given prior notices to both parties and on  the basis of work memo submitted by both parties, Expert conducted inspection.  Water samples were collected from the outlet of the purification system and sent to the quality control Sub District Laboratory for testing.  After getting the report Expert has filed report.

            At the evidence time complainant has filed chief affidavit and documents.

            He was examined as Pw1 and the documents were marked as Ext.A1 to A5 and the expert report was marked as Ext.C1.  Ext.A1 is bill  issued from Yuva Aqua Solutions dated 01/12/2022, Ext.A2 is Water tank bill issued by Global Traders dated 25/11/2022, Ext.A3 is Lawyer notice, Ext. A4 is postal receipt and Ext.A5 is return notice.  Pw1 has not been cross-examined by OP.  So the allegation of the complainant became unchallenged.  Here Ext.C1 is an authenticated document prepared by a qualified Expert person.  On perusal of Ext.C1,  the expert commissioner opinioned that from the test result of water that the turbidity level were found to be higher than the acceptable limit indicating the “need for more efficient filtration”.

            Here in the version though OP contended that though he advised to install double vessel, as per complainant’s instruction single vessel system was installed.  But as OP has neither adduced any evidence of his own nor cross-examined Pw1, his contentions in the versions cannot be believed and accepted.  So we are constrained to accept the allegations of complainant that even after reported the defect of the purifying system, OP failed to do any after service.  Through complaint, chief affidavit and EXt.C1 complainant has proved his allegations unequivocal.  So complainant is entitled to get relief from OP.

            Under the facts and circumstances of this case, complaint stands allowed.  Through Ext.A1, complainant proved that he paid Rs.28,000/- to OP.

            In the result complaint is allowed in part.  Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.28,000/-  to the complainant.  Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of the proceedings of this case.   Opposite party shall comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.  Failing which, the awarded amount Rs.28,000+25,000 will carry interest @ 7%  per annum from the date of order till realization.  Complainant can execute the order as per the provision in Consumer Protection Act 2019.  After payment of the awarded amount to complainant, OP can take back the product from complainant’s premise.

Exts.

A1-Bill  issued from Yuva Aqua Solutions dated 01/12/2022

A2 - Water tank bill issued by Global Traders dated 25/11/2022

A3 - Lawyer notice

A4 - Postal receipt

A5 - Return notice.

Pw1- Sunil A V-Complainant

     Sd/                                                                                 Sd/                                                          Sd/

PRESIDENT                                                                 MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                                               Molykutty Mathew                                     Sajeesh K.P

(mnp)

                                               /Forwarded by order/

                                               Assistant Registrar