Om Parkash filed a consumer case on 05 Feb 2018 against Arvind Electrical & Electronics in the Ambala Consumer Court. The case no is CC/10/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 07 Feb 2018.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
FORUM AMBALA
Complaint case no. : 10 of 2017
Date of Institution : 09.01.2017
Date of decision : 05.02.2018
Om Parkash S/o Atma Ram, Resident of House No.898, Anand Nagar, Dalipgarh Babyal, Ambala Cantt, Tehsil & District Ambala.
……. Complainant.
1. ARVIND Electrical & Electronics, 177A, Rai Market, Ambala Cantt-133001 (Through its Auth. Prop.)
2. Ambey Electronic SONY Service Centre, D-S-14, First Floor, Jail Land, HUDA Market, Sector-1, Ambala City.
3. SONY Electronics Manufacturing at A-31, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi, Pincode-110044, (through its GM).
….…. Opposite Parties
Before : SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT
SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER
MS. ANAMAIKA GUPTA, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
OPs already ex parte v.o.d. 28.02.2017.
ORDER:
In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant purchased Sony LED Model 50W800D Chassis No.8525581 for Rs. 82,000/- from OP No.1 vide Bill No.1520 dated 28 Oct. 2016 with one year warranty. On 24.12.2016 as when the son of the complainant trying to fix the PAN Drive behind the SONY LED and saw the corner of the above Sony LED has been broken, in the mean time the complainant told the OP No.1 on telephone and the OP No.1 assured him to replace the same within short time. After then a representative of service centre/OP No.2 came to the house of the complainant and take a photo of the same and assured him to replace the same SONY LED in very short time but till date nobody has come to visit of the resident of the complainant & has not taken any action for replace the above defected SONY LED. The complainant again & again approached to the OPs No. 1 & 2 but not attended the complainant and flatly refused to do anything in the matter. Because of the negligent attitude of the OPs, the complainant has to harass and suffered mental, physical and monetary loss which is a clear cut deficiency in the service on the part of the OPs as well as unfair trade practice on their part. Hence, the present complaint.
2. Registered notices issued to Ops but none has turned up on their behalf and they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 28.02.2017.
3 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X alongwith document as annexure C-1 and close his evidence. OPs have proceeded against ex parte v.o.d. 28.02.2017.
4. We have heard learned counsel of the complainant and carefully gone through the case file. The case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased SONY LED Model 50W800D Chassis No.8525581 for Rs. 82,000/- vide Bill No.1520 dated 28.10.2016 Annexure C-1 from the OP no.1 and the same was having 1 year warranty. After purchasing and installation of the said Sony LED, on 24.12.2016 saw the corner of the above Sony LED has been broken and he complaint for the same to the OP No.1 then after OP No.2. The representative of OP No.2 came to the house of the complainant and take a photo for the same. After that Ops have taken no action for rectified in the LED in question. At the time of arguments, the complainant moved an application for inspection of the LED in question and same was allowed by this Forum v.o.d. 28.07.2017 and directed to the Principal of Govt. Polytechnic, Ambala City v.o.d. to appoint an Expert person dealing with the problems of the home appliances. Accordingly, Sh. Ravinder Singh Punia, Lecturer, was appointed as Local Commissioner who tendered his report on 27.09.2017 whereby he has pointed out that:
“The Corner of the disputed LED is broken from the back side of TV.A Crack line of almost Two inch in length is there on the back side of right corner of disputed TV. Otherwise it is working fine. The outer body of disputed LED TV is broken from one Corner”.
On the other hand, OPs already proceeded against exparte against v.o.d. 28.02.2017. As such, the contents enumerated in the complaint remained un-rebutted and thus we have no other option except to believe the version as well as documents submitted by the complainant. It is also clear the LED has been broken within short period i.e. two months after its purchase. We have also gone through the report of LC which clearly shows that the corner of the LED is broken, so this Forum has no option to replace the same because such type of the defects are not repairable and it is a crystal clear case of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops No. 1 & 3.
5. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is hereby allowed no order to cost and Ops No. 1 and 3 (being a dealer and manufacturer) are directed to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-
(i) The Ops No. 1 & 3 are directed to replace the SONY LED in question with new one of the same Model and if the same model is not available then to refund the cost of the LED to the tune of Rs.82,000/- (Annexure C-1) within 30 days after receiving copy of the order failing which OP will pay the interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the default period, subject to handing over the old LED either to the OP No.1 or OP No.3.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.
Announced on : 05.02.2018
(PUSHPENDER KUMAR) (ANAMIKA GUPTA) (D.N. ARORA)
Member Member President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.