22.08.2024:

ORDER

Delivered by Mr.K.B.Sangannanavar. Prl.DJ (R) Judicial Member.

01.   Counsel for RP-Petitioner and Respondent No.1 are present.  Heard learned Counsels and perused the RP papers, found OP No.2 -Samsung Authorized Service Center is placed   Ex-parte before the District Commission, hence ordered to dispense with notice against Respondent No.2 in this Revision Petition to avoid delay and expenditure.

02.   The RP – Petitioner is a complainant in CC No.48/2022 on the file of District Commission, Shivamogga, and he has raised consumer complaint on 21.05.2022 against OP Nos.1 & 2 seeking refund of the amount of Micro oven along with damages and cost with interest and  such other reliefs deem it fit.  OP No.1 submits,    OP No.2  is placed Ex-parte and the District Commission held an enquiry,  found a case in favour of complainant in-part and  directed OP Nos.1 & 2 to refund Rs.14,068/- with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from 05.04.2022 and held liability  of OP Nos.1 & 2 is  joint  and several  and directed OP No.1 to pay the said sum along with interest within 45 days and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost within 45 days from the date of the order failing which amount shall carry interest at the rate of 10% per annum till recovery of the same.  After passing of this order OP No.1 had filed an application under section 14(iii) R/w Section 5 of Limitation Act, R/w section 151 of CPC to condone the delay of 04 months in filing application under section 40 of C.P. Act, 2019 to review the order dated: 03.02.2023, was strongly opposed by complainant/Revision Petitioner herein.  However District Commission proceed to allow  the Review application filed under section 40 of C.P. Act, 2019 and directed the complainant to return the micro oven purchased from OP No.1 within 15 days from the date of the order and after returning of micro-oven, OP Nos.1 & 2 shall comply the order forthwith.  It is this order is assailed in this Revision Petition, contending, the District Commission committed grave error in passing review order after four months. 

03.   Learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submits that, order passed in C.C. No.48/2022 dated: 03.02.2023 is already complied with, hence submits that, while passing the order dated: 03.02.2023 District Commission had failed to direct the complainant to return the micro-oven purchased from OP No.1 and in this regard submits that, complainant had purchased micro-oven on 11.12.2020 for Rs.16,600/- under 10 years warranty and he had raised Consumer Complaint on 21.05.2022 and in such circumstances District Commission, while passing the impugned order held on failure of Ops to remove the defects found in micro-oven to avoid further complication to get redress of the dispute raised by the complainant in most reasonably  ordered to return the sale price of Rs.14,068/-, since Rs.2,532.20 was deducted towards SGST and CGST, which was remitted to the government which cannot be said either unjust or improper. We have to observe herein, the period of usage of micro-oven by the complainant has also to be taken in to consideration. In our view  the District Commission, considered  all the  aspects of the matter while  exercising the powers vested under Section 40, while passing the impugned order, which cannot be said either contrary to facts or law to interfered in exercise revision powers.  Hence we proceed to dismiss the Revision Petition with no order as to costs.             

04. Send copy of this order to the District Commission and the parties to the Revision Petition.

            Sd/-                                                                         Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                           JUDICIAL MEMBER

KNMP*