BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 14/12/2011

Date of Order : 29/03/2012

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

C.C. No. 695/2011

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The case of the complainant is as follows :

In 2007, the complainant purchased a wash basin which was dealt in by the 1^st opposite party at a price of Rs. 52,399/-. The 1^st opposite party delivered the same through the 2^nd opposite party their dealer. Hair line cracks started showing consequently on the wash basin, since. A complaint was lodged with the 1^st opposite party on 22-02-2008 regarding the same. Only after a lot of follow up in mid 2010 did they supply a different design wash basin, but of an inferior quality. The same was not accepted and the complainant requested to replace the same with another hassle free one. The second wash basin supplied by them is still lying unused. The complainant is entitled either to get the replacement of the wash basin with the same make and model or to get the price refunded together with compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- towards costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.

2. The version of the 1^st opposite party :

The complainant purchased a wash basin manufactured by Pozzi-Ginori, Italy. The 1^st opposite party is neither the manufacturer nor the dealer of the wash basin. So, the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party and mis-joinder of necessary party. The complaint is barred by limitation as well, since the alleged cause of action for this complaint has arisen on 22-02-2008. The complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs as claimed for.

3. Despite service of notice from this Forum, the 2^nd opposite party did not respond to the same for reasons of their own. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the parties. Heard the aggrieved complainant who appeared in person and the learned counsel for the 1^st opposite party.

4. The points that emanated for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complaint is barred by limitation?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the wash basin replaced with a new one or to get the price refunded?

3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and costs of the proceedings from the opposite parties?

5. Point Nos. i. and ii. :- According to the complainant, in 2007 he purchased a wash basin supposed to be manufactured by Pozzi-Ginori, Italy and he noticed hair line cracks in the product and he intimated the same to the 1^st opposite party on 22-02-2008. He claims of the defect of the product has been intimated to the 1^st opposite party. However in response, the 1^st opposite party replaced the defective wash basin with a new one. However, the complainant was not satisfied with the same. The grievance of the complainant is either to get the wash basin replaced or to get the price refunded.

6. The complainant had informed the 1^st opposite party of the same and was given a replacement of a wash basin with a new one with which seemingly the complainant was not satisfied of which he had complained. The complainant still has not refrain from the demand of replacement of the original product as stated or refund of its price. There is nothing before us to substantiate any of these contentions. This Forum cannot go by the apprehensions which are unfounded to err in the eye of law which on such grounds would be unpardonable. In view of the above, we only take a view to dismiss the complaint. Ordered accordingly.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29^th day of March 2012

Forwarded/By Order, Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Senior Superintendent.