DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 35 of 2019

 

Sri Raju Bhowmik,

S/O. Late Makhan Lal Bhowmik,

Of Village:-Surendranagar,

P.O.& P.S.-Kakraban,

Dist.-Gomati Tripura, Pin-799105..…..…............................Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. BIGBAZAR (Located in ML. Plaza),

Ground Floor, Below Rupasi Cinema Hall,

Mantri Bari Road, Agartala, West Tripura,

Pin-799105.

 

2. Groupe SEB India(P) Ltd. 

Village Malkumajra, Paragna Dharampur,

Baddi Nalagarh Road,

Distt.-Solan (Himachal Pradesh)

INDIA-173205 …............................................................Opposite parties.

 

 

   __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SRI UMESH DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SMT. Dr BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the Complainant : In person. 

 

For the O.P. No.1 : None appeared. 

 

For the O.P. No.2 : Sri Sampad Choudhury,

  Advocate. 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:  18/03/2020

J U D G M E N T

The Complainant Sri Raju Bhowmik,  set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 complaining deficiency in service committed by the O.Ps. 

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant on 11/11/2016 purchased one Mixture Grinder of Maharaja Whiteline brand from Big Bazar, Mantri Bari Road, Agartala , West Tripura i.e. the O.P. No.1. The product was having 02 years warranty and 05 years motor warranty for repairing / replacing parts free of cost against manufacturing defect as well as functional part subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in  the warranty card. The complainant alleged that after using of the product for few days it became out of order. Then the Complainant approached the O.P. No.1, Big Bazar with the product and inquired about the service centre for getting the product repaired / replaced. The official of the O.P. No.1 readily could not provide him address of the service centre but he was assured that he would be called him after finding out the service centre. The Complainant alleged that the official of the O.P. No.1 could not find out the service centre but he was advised to visit Masjid Patti, Agartala to search for the service centre. The complainant after long time of searching could not locate the service centre. He again went to Big Bazar and lodged a written complaint with their complain book. The staff of the Big Bazar told him thatthe complaint would be sent to the Appropriate Authority. The complainant found that his complaint did not evoke any response. After few weeks the Complainant on his own accord went to the PRESTIGE SERVICE CENTRE situated at Banamalipur but the customers'-desk officer of the centre refused to repair Maharaja product stating the ground that the service centre attended to only Prestige Company's Products. The complainant alleged that being aggrieved he again visited the Big Bazar and lodged written complaint for the second time.  The Manager of the O.P. No.1 at that time verbally requested him to get the product repaired from any other service centre with giving him assurance to bear the necessary charges for repairing it by him. But the Manager was reluctant to give any written assurance in this respect. At the same time the Manager also informed him that the Maharaja Company does not have any service centre at Agartala.     

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the conduct of the O.P. No.1,  the Complainant has filed the instant complaint before the Forum against the O.P. No.1 claiming Rs.25,000/- as compensation for causing harassment to him.  

Hence this case.

 

2. In due course of time notice was duly sent to the O.P. No.1 from the Forum. 

  The O.P. No. 1 even after receiving the notice has not turned up before this Forum. The O.P. No.1 was however allowed sufficient opportunity to file written objection but the O.P. No.1 did not file W.O. Hence as per order dated 26/07/2019 the case proceeded exparte against the O.P. No.1.    

               On 02/09/2019 the complainant filed a petition before the Forum praying for imp-leading  the manufacturer of the product as a party by amendment of the complaint. The prayer was allowed. Consequently, Group SEB India Private Limited, Village-Malkumajra, Pargana Dharmpur, Baddi Nalagarth Road, Solan, Himachal Pradesh has been added as O.P. No.2 in the complaint. 

               In due course of time notice was duly sent to the O.P. No.2 from the Forum.  The O.P. No.2 appeared before the Forum through his engaged Advocate. The O.P. No.2 however could not file his W.O. within 45 days as stipulated U/S 13(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The written objection though filed thereafter has not been accepted and considered by the Forum.           

EVIDENCE ADDUCE BY THE PARTIES:-

 

3. The Complainant examined himself as PW-I and submitted his examination in chief by way of affidavit. He has produced 03 documents namely Cash memo of the product(Mixture Grinder) issued by the O.P. No.1, Warranty Card of the product & Xerox copy of the complaint dated 27/04/2019 which was lodged by the Complainant with the O.P. No.1  The documents on identification have been marked as Exhibit – 1 Series. The complainant was  cross examined by the O.P. Nos.2 on law point. 

           The O.P. Nos.2 did not adduce any documentary evidence to controvert the case of the Complainant on the point of law.            

 

4. Now it is to be adjudicated as to whether the Complainant has proved his case against the O.Ps. and whether he is entitled to get any compensation / relief from the O.Ps. 

      We have heard arguments from the Complainant and that of the Learned Advocate for O.P.  No.2. 

While arguing the case Learned Advocate for the O.P. No.2 has fairly submitted that RAFCO, Akhaura Road, Agartala is the Authorized Service Centre of the O.P. No.2 and that the Complainant can avail warranty facility of his Mixture Grinder from the RAFCO, Agartala as per the terms and conditions stipulated in the warranty card. Learned Advocate has assured the Forum that he will extend help and cooperation so that the Complainant can get proper service from the service centre at Agartala. Learned Advocate for the O.P. No.2 urged that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. No.2 as the complainant did never approach the O.P. No.2 for service facility of the product which was purchased from the O.P. No.1.  

We have carefully gone through the complaint and the Exhibited documents of the Complainant. 

It is evident from the case record that the Complainant purchased one Mixture Grinder of Maharaja Whiteline Brand from Big Bazar, Mantri Bari Road, Agartala , West Tripura i.e. the O.P. No.1 on payment of due price. The complainant submitted the cash memo and warranty card against the product. We are convinced that the O.P. No.1 though sold the product to the Complainant but has failed to arrange service facility when the Complainant had approached him with the defective Mixture Grinder.  The O.P. No.1 being the seller of the product should have helped the Complainant in resolving the problem having been faced by the Complainant with the product. We find that the Complainant has emphatically asserted that the Manager of the O.P. No.1 told him that there was no service centre of the Maharaja Whiteline Mixture Grinder at Agartala. According to us the O.P. No.1 should not have sold the product to the Complainant having known the fact that there was no service centre of the product sold by him to the Complainant. Even the O. P. No.1 has not controverted the contention of the Complainant by filing written objection. Though the O.P. No.1 received notice from the Forum did not bother to appear before the Forum. The O.P. No.1 according to us has thus indulged in unfair trade practice and guilty of deficiency of service towards the Complainant. 

The O.P. No.2 being the manufacturer, according to us is under legal obligation to set right the Mixture Grinder of the Complainant as it has warranty coverage. Learned Advocate for the O.P. No.2 has also assured of giving such service through the Authorized Service Centre “RAFCO” which is situated at Agartala. 

 

5. In view of the discussion made above, we find and hold that the Complainant has succeeded in establishing his case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. We find the O.P. Nos.1 guilty of committing deficiency of service and unfair trade practice towards the Complainant. The complainant is thus entitled to get compensation / relief.

In the result, we direct the O.P. No.1 to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment, apart from litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.  The Complainant is thus entitled to get in total Rs.7,000/-(Rs.5,000/- + Rs.2,000/- ) from the O.P. No.1 The payment is to be made within 2 months from the date of judgment, if not, it will carry interest @ 9% P.A. till the payment is made in full. 

        Having considered the submission made by the Learned Advocate for the O.P. No.2 we direct the O.P. No.2 being the manufacturer of the product to arrange for repairing the Mixture Grinder of the Complainant through his Authorized Service Centre i.e. the RAFCO, Akhaura Road, Agartala within 03 weeks from the date of judgment and take the initiative in intimating the Complainant to approach the Service Centre at Agartala for repair of the Mixture Grinder. 

 

    Announced.

 

SRI  BAMDEB  MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

SRI  UMESH  DAS

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

 WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

SMT. DR  BINDU  PAL

 MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA