BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL.
Complaint Case No.419 of 2020.
Date of instt.:25.11.2020.
Date of Decision:25.02.2022.
- Jaipur Hospital, Rishi Nagar, Behind Distt. Courts Kaithal through its Doctor Dr. D.S.Panwar.
- Devender Singh Panwar (Dr.) Director of Jaipur Hospital, Rishi Nagar, Kaithal.
……….Complainant. Versus
- Anoma Medical Sollutions B-14, 3rd Floor, South Anarkali, PO Krishna Nagar Delhi, through its prop./partner/manager.
- Richard Wolf India Pvt. Ltd. having its office at JMD Pacific Square No.211-A, Sector-15 Part-II, Gurugram/Gurgao-122001 (NCR).
..………Respondents.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act
CORAM: DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT.
SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.
SH. RAJBIR SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Ranjeet Arora, Advocate, for the complainant.
Respondents exparte.
ORDER
DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT
Jaipur Hospital through its Doctor D.S.Panwar-Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the respondents.
In nutshell, the facts of present case are that the complainant No.1 is a well recognized hospital and is being run by Dr. Devender Singh Panwar, complainant No.2. It is alleged that the complainant No.2 to earn his livelihood purchased a Nephroscope 20.8 fr. Cat: 8964.401 bearing Sr.No.1100572251 of Richard Wolf Company (respondent No.2) in the sum of Rs.1,58,344/- from the respondent No.1 vide invoice No.AMS/044/19-20 dt. 02.09.2019 against the warranty of one year. It is further alleged that unfortunately within two months, the above-said product did not work properly and started creating disturbance in the vision (low vision), so, the complainant informed the respondents either to replace the above-said defective product with the new one or to pay the price money of the same. The complainant made several requests to the respondents but the respondents did not redress the grievances of complainant. So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of respondents and prayed for acceptance of complaint.
2. Upon notice, the respondents did not appear and opted to proceed against exparte vide order dt. 27.01.2021.
3. Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C3 and thereafter, closed the evidence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and perused the case file carefully and minutely.
5. Sh. Ranjeet Arora, Adv. for the complainant has stated that despite of notice issued to respondents, they did not appear in the court, hence, they were proceeded against exparte on 27.01.2021. It has been argued by Sh. Ranjeet Arora, Adv. for the complainant that the complainant No.1 is a well recognized hospital and is being run by Dr. Devender Singh Panwar, complainant No.2. It has been further argued that the complainant No.2 purchased a Nephroscope 20.8 fr. Cat: 8964.401 bearing Sr.No.1100572251 of Richard Wolf Company (respondent No.2) in the sum of Rs.1,58,344/- from the respondent No.1 vide invoice No.AMS/044/19-20 dt. 02.09.2019, copy of bill is Annexure-C1. It has been further argued that at the time of purchase, the respondents assured that this product is the best product and also gave the warranty of above-said product of one year. It has been further argued that unfortunately within two months, the above-said product did not work properly and started creating disturbance in the vision (low vision). Hence, the complainant informed the respondents regarding the same immediately to replace the above-said defective product with the new one or to refund the sale price but the respondents did not listen the complainant and did not replace the product and neither paid the price of the aforesaid product. The aforesaid product was within the warranty period of one year but it had become defective within two months of the purchase having dim vision.
6. Since the product purchased by the complainant was defective one. Hence, the respondents are hereby directed to replace the aforesaid Nephroscope to the complainant within one month from today or in alternative, they are directed to refund the amount of Rs.1,58,344/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from today till its realization within one month. Hence, the complaint is accepted exparte accordingly. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
Dt.:25.02.2022.
(Dr. Neelima Shangla)
President.
(Rajbir Singh), (Suman Rana),
Member. Member.
Typed by: Sanjay Kumar, S.G.
