Kerala

Kozhikode

CC/406/2011

RAJANEESH KUMAR.O.K - Complainant(s)

Versus

DREAMS CAR ACCESSORIES - Opp.Party(s)

28 Feb 2013

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/406/2011
 
1. RAJANEESH KUMAR.O.K
SREEVIHAR, VATOLY BAZAR, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE 673623.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. DREAMS CAR ACCESSORIES
CDA BUILDING, MINI BYE-PASS, NEAR PASSPORT OFFICE ERANCHIPALAM, CALICUT 673006.
2. SONIC VISION,
AUTHORISED SERVICE CENTRE, KENWOOD NEAR PASSPORT OFFICE, CALICUT 673006.
3. KENWOOD, CAR AUDIO COMPANY,
NIPPON AUDITORONJ X LTD, C-4, SECTOR 12, NOIDA 201301, UP
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONOURABLE MR. G Yadunadhan, BA.,LLB., PRESIDENT
 HONOURABLE MR. L Jyothikumar, LLB., Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.
C.C.406/11
Dated this the 28th   day of February 2013.
 
            ( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB.                              : President)                       
                             Sri. L. Jyothikumar, B.A., LLB.                                  : Member
 
 
 
ORDER
 
By L.Jyothikumar, Member:
 
            The petition was filed on 19.10.2011. The complainant had purchased a Kenwood car CD Player on 20.10.2009 from the first opposite party’s show room for an amount of Rs.7500/-. The first opposite party assured the complainant that the CD player was of superior quality and a replacement warranty for a period of two year. CD player purchased by the complainant was defective within 2 months of purchase. The complainant approached the first opposite party for replacement of CD player. After 10 months complainant received the new CD player. The CD player carried a warranty for a period of 2 years. But within 3 days same defects were repeated. The complainant had repeatedly requested the  opposite party 1 & 2 for repair or replacement. But the defects of the CD player was not rectified and the opposite parties failed to attend the grievance of the complainant. Complainant is alleging negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties by not attending the grievance of the complaint. Complainant alleges unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and has filed this complaint seeking relief.
 
            Notice was served to the opposite party 1 to 3. Opposite parties have filed joint version denying the averments in the complaint except those that are expressly admitted. Opposite parties denies that the CD player purchased by the complainant was defective. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence Opposite party submits to dismiss the complaint.
 
            The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief. Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exhibits A1 to A3 were marked on complainant’s side. When the case was posted for the cross examination of complainant all the opposite parties were called absent and set exparte.
 
            The case of the complainant is that Car CD Player purchased by him from the opposite party No.1 became defective within 2 months. CD Player had a replacement warranty for a period of two years in case of any defects. After 10 months of repeated request opposite party No.1 had replaced the CD Player. But still complainant was facing the same difficulty . Copy of the warranty card is produced by the complainant.A3 document assures 2 year warranty for the CD Player. As far as this case is concerned the CD Player became defective within 3 days. From the evidence and a perusal of the documents we have come to the conclusion that the complainant is entitled for relief.
 
            In the result petition is allowed and opposite party is directed to return back Rs.7500/- the cost of the CD Player to the complainant along with a compensation of Rs.250/- within 30 days of receiving the copy of the order. Failing which the complainant is entitled for a further amount of Rs.20/- per day from the date of the order till realization.
 
Pronounced in the open court this the 28th     day of February 2013.
Date of filing:19.10.2011.
 
                           SD/- PRESIDENT                                              SD/- MEMBER
 
APPENDIX
 
Documents exhibited for the complainant:
A1.Quotation dtd.20.10.2009for Rs.14,250/-
A2.Warranty card sl.No.90813 dtd.20.10.2009.
A3.Warranty CardSl.No.100714 dtd.20.10.2009
 
Documents exhibited for the opposite party:
 Nil
 
Witness examined for the complainant:
PW1.Rajinesh Kumar(Complainant)
 
Witness examined for the opposite party:
None.
                                                                                                                        Sd/-President
//True copy//
 
(Forwarded/By Order)
 
 
 
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
 
 
 
[HONOURABLE MR. G Yadunadhan, BA.,LLB.,]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONOURABLE MR. L Jyothikumar, LLB.,]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.