Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Presiding Member
- Sh.Sanjay Kapoor complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act on the allegations that on 3.7.2012 complainant visited the shop of opposite party No.2 for purchaser of inverter and battery for his home where opposite party No.2 showed a battery of Base brand Model BT500. Before purchase of the said battery, opposite party No.2 assured the complainant that the said battery is the product of Panasonic and equipped with latest and advanced technology and is free from any type of manufacturing defect and a back up of more than 12 hours. Opposite party No.2 further assured that the life of the said battery is minimum of seven years and it carried a warranty of 48 months. Opposite party No.2 further allured the complainant that the said company has a local service centre in Amritsar near Bus Stand. On the said allurement , complainant purchased a battery of brand namely BASE Model BT500 for Rs. 11700/- vide retail invoice No. 2030 dated 3.7.2012 having 48 months warranty. Few days of the purchase of the battery, it did not give proper back up as the back up is not more than 4 hours. In the month of February, 2016 the battery started giving troubles as it gave only a back of 10-15 minutes and thereafter it indicated LOW BATTERY. The complainant approached opposite party No.2, who told the complainant that since the battery is in warranty period, the complainant should lodge the complaint to opposite party No.1. But despite various calls, no one turned up either from opposite party No.1 or from opposite party No.2. The complainant also visited the shop of opposite party No.2 and lodged complaint, but no convincing reply was received from opposite party No.2. The complainant also requested opposite party No.2 to provide the address of the local service centre of opposite party No.1, but the opposite party failed to provide the same . Thereafter the complainant contacted opposite party No.1 on toll free number 18001800007 mentioned on the warranty card . But to the utter surprise of the complainant the said number was closed with following tone “SERVICE TO THE DIALED NUMBER ARE TEMPORARILY WITHDRAWN”. On 2.6.2016 complainant also sent an SMS to 56767 as instructed on the warranty card supplied with the battery and in return to the said message received a message as follows ‘WELCOME TO BASE BATTERIES, OUR EXECUTIVE WILL SHORTLY CONTACT YOU. FOR MORE INFORMATION VISIT WWW.BASEBATTERIES.COM OR CALL TOO FREE 18001800007”. But uptil date no one turn and thereafter complainant continuously calling and trying to contact opposite party No.1 and also approached opposite party No.2 telephonically and by paying personal visits to his shop, but to no avail. Finally on 25.6.2016 complainant again approached opposite party No.2 and requested him to do the needful, but opposite party No.2 flatly refused to give the telephone number of opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.2 also told that the complainant should forget the opposite party No.1, the battery and its warranty as the warranty card supplied with the battery is merely a piece of paper and further told that the job of opposite party No.2 is only to sell the batteries and has no responsibility with its functioning or any warranty of the product. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-
- Opposite parties No.1 & 2 be directed to replace the battery with new one or to refund the amount of Rs. 11700/- paid by the complainant to opposite parties ;
- Opposite parties may also be directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- on account of mental pain, agony, harassment and inconvenience suffered by the complainant.
- Opposite parties be also directed to pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 10000/-.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 did not opt to put in appearance despite service, as such they were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
3. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bill Ex.C-2, copy of warranty card Ex.C-3 and closed his evidence.
4. We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
5. It is proved on record that the complainant did purchase battery of brand namely BASE model BT 500 worth Rs. 11700/- from opposite party No.2 which was manufactured by opposite party No.1 vide retail invoice No. 2030 dated 3.7.2012, copy of retail invoice is Ex.C-2 on record. In the month of February, 2016, the battery started troubling the complainant as it gave only a back up of 10-15 minutes and thereafter inverter indicated LOW BATTERY. The complainant intimated opposite party No.2 regarding the problem , who advised the complainant to approach opposite party No.1 but has not provided the address as well as telephone number of opposite party No.1. However, the complainant contacted the opposite party No.1 on toll free No. 18001800007 mentioned on the warranty card and also sent SMS and brought the defect to their knowledge. But no one turned up to redress the grievance of the complainant. Again on 25.5..2016 the complainant again approached opposite party No.2 and asked for the address or telephone number of opposite party No.1, but at that time opposite party No.2 flatly refused to give the telephone number of opposite party No.1 and told that complainant should forget the opposite party No.1 and the warranty card supplied with the battery is merely a piece of paper and has no value . Opposite party No.2 further told that the job of opposite party No.2 is only to sell the batteries and has no responsibility with its functioning or any warranty of the product. The battery in dispute is still within warranty period , as per warranty card Ex.C-3 and opposite parties are under legal obligation to set the battery in order without charging any amount from the complainant. However, the evidence adduced by the complainant in support of his case has gone unrebutted on record as the opposite parties, despite due service, did not opt to put in appearance and contest the complaint. This means & imply that opposite parties have no defence to offer and they impliedly admitted the claim of the complaint.
6. The only ground to deny the liability by opposite party No.2 is that they are only the seller and has no responsibility with the functioning of the battery or any warranty of the product . Reliance in this connection has been made upon judgement reported as Pioneer Motors (Kannur) Pvt.Ltd Vs. N.Chandran, Winspot Tailors and another 2010 CTJ page 344, wherein it has been held as under:-
“Both the manufacturer and its dealer are the necessary parties to the sale of a product. In case of any manufacturing defect alleged to be in that product, the dealer cannot evade its responsibility. It is as much liable to the purchaser as the manufacturer.”
7. As such we hold that opposite parties are deficient in service. Consequently instant complaint succeeds and opposite parties are directed to repair the battery in dispute belonging to the complainant to the satisfaction of the complainant without charging any amount within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order ; failing which, opposite parties shall be jointly , severally and co-extensively liable to replace the battery of the complainant with new one of same make or model or to refund the price of the battery in dispute to the tune of Rs. 11700/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint until full and final recovery . Instant complaint stands allowed ex-parte accordingly. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum .Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated :13.6.2017
