By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-
Brief of the complaint:- On 21.12.2011 the complainant approached opposite party's shop and enquired about a Whirlpool Mastermind 5 star Refrigerator but that was not ready in stock . So opposite party insisted complainant to buy a Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star Refrigerator. At the very same day the complainant was compelled to buy the Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star worth Rs.14,300/- from opposite party's shop on a condition to replace it with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator within one week. The opposite party delivered the refrigerator to complainant's house. When complainant tried to open the packet he noticed that it was already opened, in the bottom also seal has broken and some scratches over and inside the refrigerator. The complainant intimated this to opposite party and opposite party promised that he will replace it within one week with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator. Thereafter the complainant came to know that the opposite party charged an excess amount of Rs.3,000/- towards the price. The complainant approached the opposite party more than 30 times but he did not replaced it with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator.
2. On 02.04.2012 the opposite party given a cheque for Rs.14,300/- to complainant as security to the price of the refrigerator and the complainant presented the cheque at South Indian Bank, Kalpetta, it was returned due to insufficient fund. Even after repeated demands opposite party either replaced the refrigerator or returned the price. This is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. So the complainant prays to replace the Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 star and he also demands Rs.25,000/- as compensation.
3. The opposite party filed version and stated as follows:- On 01.12.2011 the complainant approached opposite party's shop and demanded a Videocon refrigerator but that was not ready in stock, so the complainant booked for Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star and paid Rs.5,000/- as advance. This opposite party given a cheque to the complainant for the security of the advance amount. Thereafter on 21.12.2011 the complainant purchased a Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator from opposite party's shop and paid the balance amount of Rs.9,300/- to opposite party. The opposite party has given the complainant a bill of Rs.14,300/- dated 21.12.2011. The opposite party never offered the complainant to replace Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator. According to opposite party all these allegations are false and fabricated. If any scratches on the refrigerator or defect in packing, this opposite party is not responsible for the same. This may happened at the time of transportation or careless operation from the part of the complainant. So opposite party defends that there is no deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party. The complainant purchased Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator according to his own interest.. So the complaint is liable to be dismissed with opposite party's cost.
4. On considering the complaint and version the following points are to be considered:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- To prove complainant's case he filed chief affidavit and complainant is examined as PW1, Exts.A1 to A4 are marked. Ext.A1 is the bill dated 21.12.2011 for an amount of Rs.14,300/- issued by opposite party to the complainant. It shows that on 21.12.2011
the complainant purchased a Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star Refrigerator from opposite party's shop. Ext.A2 is the Warranty card. Ext.A3 is the cheque of South Indian Bank. Ext.A4 is the intimation from South Indian Bank, Kalpetta.
6. On going through the complaint and above documents it is found that complainant has purchased a Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator from the opposite party's shop on 21.12.2011. To substantiate complainant's case complainant adduced oral evidence. Relying on the evidence adduced by the complainant we are in the opinion that there is deficiency in service from the part of opposite party. From the evidence it is clear that opposite party promised to replace Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator with Whirpool Mastermind 5 star within one week. In the witness box complainant deposed that ....The present condition of the refrigerator whether it is using or still in the packing is now in question.
7. No steps taken by opposite party to prove the present condition of the refrigerator. Considering the evidence of the complainant it is clear that opposite party made assurance to replace the refrigerator within no time. Thereafter several occasions complainant approached opposite party but it was in vain. The opposite party never replaced the refrigerator or returned the price. Even though the opposite party has stated many things in the version it is not proved before the Forum by adducing evidence. So we are in the opinion that there is deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party. The point No.1 is found accordingly.
8. Point No.2:- The complainant is entitled to get a Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator that he demanded. So opposite party is directed to replace the Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator that he delivered with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator and also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as cost and compensation. Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to replace the Videocon REF VAP 243 1BH 3 star refrigerator that he delivered with Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star refrigerator to the complainant. If the price of Whirlpool Mastermind 5 Star Refrigerator is more than Rs.14,300/- (Rupees Fourteen Thousand and Three Hundred Only) complainant is directed to pay the excess amount.. The Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as cost and compensation to the complainant. This Order is to be complied by the opposite party within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the 26th day of April 2013.
Date of Filing:18.04.2012.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Raveendran. P. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Bill. dt:21.12.2011.
A2. Warranty Card.
A3. Cheque. dt:02.04.2012.
A4. Intimation from Bank. dt:18.04.2012.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party.
Nil.
SD/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
