DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
North 24 Pgs., BARASAT
C.C. No./282/2019
Date of Filing Date of Admission Date of Disposal
17.09.2019 25.09.2019 27.03.2024
Complainant/s:- | Bappaditya Tarafder, S/o. Basudeb Tarafder, Flat No. A, 3rd Floor, Rabindra Pally, Nabapally, P.O. Nabapally, P.S. Barasat, Dist-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700126. -Vs- |
Opposite Party/s:- | 1.Barmecha Refrigeration Pvt. Ltd, 1, Chandni Chowk Street, Kolkata-700072, W.B. P.S. Bowbazar. 2. Ishika Service Centre, Volagiri Road, Monirampur, Khayaghat, P.O. Monirampur, P.S. Barrackpore, Dist- North 24 Parganas, Kolkata700120, West Bengal. 3. Saurav Jha , The Customer Relation Manager, Havels India Ltd, QRG Towers, 2D, Sector 126, Expressway, Noida, P.S. Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201304. . |
P R E S E N T :- Sri. Daman Prosad Biswas……….President.
:- Sri. Abhijit Basu…………………. Member.
JUDGMENT /FINAL ORDER
Complainant above named filed this complaint under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 against the opposite parties praying for direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs 35,250/- along with interest, compensation amounting to Rs. 20,000/-, Litigation cost amounting to Rs. 20,000/- and other reliefs.
He alleged that he purchased one AC on 30.03.2019 from the O.P. No.1 after making payment amounting to Rs. 32,500/- . On 303.04.19 when service boy of O.P. No.2 came and open the sealed box , he found cabinet of cracked. He thereafter contacted with the office of the aforesaid service centre and inform the complainant that aforesaid complaint is under process and company would change the cabinet as soon as possible. He further install the AC and told the complainant that if any problems occurred in future he will attend the same. They give Rs. 2,750/- as installation charge. The complainant noticed that said AC was not functioning properly. Complainant informed the authorized service centre on 17.04.2019. Service Centre deputed one boy but he could not solve the problem. After two days other two service engineer came and tried to change the swing motor but complainant refused to allow the same because it was a new product and complainant wanted the replacement of AC. Complainant further noticed that water leakage was started from AC cabinet on 05.05.2019. He informed the matter to O.P. No.3. O.P. No.3 assured AC would be replaced by a new AC. AC was replaced on 25.05.2019 by new one. It was inferior quality in comparison with the previous AC. Thereafter O.P. No.3 asked the petitioner to take another model and petitioner was agreed but O.P. No.3 could not deliver the same on time. Due to delay of aforesaid service complainant brought another AC from another company. Petitioner purchased the first ACon 30.03.2019 and O.P No.3 replaced another AC on 29.05.2019 but from both the AC did not get proper service and he compelled to purchase another AC. Thereafter on 30.07.2019 complainant gave a legal notice to the O.Ps and requested them to refund the aforesaid some.
O.P. Nos. 2-3 appeared in this record and filed W.V and denied the entire allegation made in the petition of complaint.
Contd/-2
C.C. No./282/2019
:: 2 ::
O. P. No. 1 subsequently filed a reply through their letterhead on 07.09.2022 though notice of this case were served upon him on 05.11.19. As they filed the said reply after the statutory period hence said reply has not been accepted.
Trial
During trial the complainant filed affidavit-in-chief.
DOCUMENT
At the time of filing of this complaint complainant filed the following documents.
- Copy of the Aadhar Card of complainant………..One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of tax invoice dated 30.03.2018…………..One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of delivery challan …………….One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of Ishika Service Centre dated 03.04.2019………One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of Ishika Service Centre dated 15.05.2019…….One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of delivery challan of tax invoice relating to second new AC dated 24.05.2019……..One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of Ishika Service Centre dated 30.03.2019………One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of document of Ishika dated 24.05.2019 ……One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of notice of complainant dated 30.05.2019………One sheet Xerox.
- Copy of tag report dated 03.06.2019 and 04.06. 2019 …….Two sheet Xerox.
- Copy of Advocate’s letter dated 30.07.2019………Three sheet Xerox.
- Copy of tag report dated 31.07.2019, 31.07.2019 and 02.08.2019 ….Three sheet Xerox.
BNA
Complainant filed BNA.
Subsequently complainant filed the following documents. Copy of power of attorney dated 30.07.2022.
Decision with Reasons
We have carefully gone through the aforesaid documents. We have heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainant at length. We have carefully considered the aforesaid documents.
On perusal of record we find that the complainant had purchased one AC machine from the O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 on 30.03.2019.
Complainant have received the same in a sealed packet but when the authorized person of the O.Ps came to the house of the complainant and open the same it was found that one crack is there in the cabinet of the AC. Complainant raised protest before the authorized representative of O.P. Nos. 1,2 and 3 then said boy contacted with the O.P. Nos. 1 and 3 and assured the complainant that said AC will be replaced in future. Thereafter complainant found that said AC is not working properly. Thereafter O.P. No.1 and 3 replaced another AC.
On perusal of record we find that value of the said AC is much higher than the previous one. But it is the submission of the complainant that second AC was inferior quality. But complainant was not satisfied with the second AC. He asked the company about the defect of second AC. Then O.P. Nos. 1 -3 assured that they will provide another AC. But O.P. Nos. 1-3 could not provide the same within the very short period during the aforesaid
Contd/-3
C.C. No./282/2019
:: 3 ::
summer season and for that reason complainant compelled to purchase another AC from another company. At the time of hearing of this case O.P. Nos. 1-3 were found absent as such we could not hear the version of O.P. Nos.1-3.
During hearing Ld.Advocate for the complainant argued before this commission that representative of O.P. No.3 took away both the AC from the house of the complainant and they not yet provided any other AC or not yet provided the purchased price in favour of the complainant.
On careful perusal on record and documents filed by the complainant we find that aforesaid act of the O.Ps are nothing but deficiency in service.
On perusal of record we find that complainant that the complainant is the consumer and opposite parties are the service provider.
Having regard to the aforesaid discussion it is clear before us that the complainant has able to establish is given by sufficient documents beyond reasonable doubt and complainant is entitled to relief as per his prayer.
In the result the present case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered,
that the present case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.P. Nos.1-3 with cost of Rs. 3,000/- to be paid by O.P. Nos.1-3 in favour of the complainant.
O.P. Nos.1-3 jointly or severally are directed to refund Rs. 35,500/- in favour of the complainant within 45 days from this day failing which complainant shall have liberty to put this order into execution.
As the O.P. Nos. 1-3 took away the aforesaid two AC from the complainant so no order is passed regarding refund of aforesaid two AC.
O.P. Nos. 1-3 jointly or severally are directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the complainant for his harassment , mental agony within 45 days from this day failing which complainant shall have liberty to put into this order of this execution.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.
Dictated and Corrected by me
President
Member President
