BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 17^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2023

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant seeking direction towards OP for the following reliefs:-

1. Direct the respondent to install the machine.
2. Directed the respondent to replace the machine with new one.
3. Direct the respondent to pay the loss of income having not use the machine from the date of purchase till this day for an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousands only)
4. Direct the respondent to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards legal expenses and other costs.
5. And grant other reliefs this Hon’ble Commission deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

The complainant has purchased the Info-tech purifier machine from Op on 25.06.2022 by paying an amount of Rs.20,000/- for which the OP has issued an invoice. On the same day the machine was installed in the premises of complainant by the OP, but the machine was not working and the representative of OP assured the complainant that they will come back to install the machine. The complainant was surprised that the OP representative did not return to install the machine as promised by them. The complainant made several calls to OP, the OP assured over the phone but none of them came forward to install the machine. Finally one person by name Prashanth came to the complainant’s place and inspected the machine and reported that the machine is not fixed properly, therefore it cannot be installed. Immediately the complainant called the OP’s and asked to rectify or replace the same with new one but the OP sent other person who was also unable to install the machine as its cap was not properly fixed, and unless the cap was fixed the machine cannot be installed. The OP further promised to return and fix machine as more manpower is required, but did not turn up or respond to the complainant. The complainant submits that the machine purchased by him was not installed. Thus he neither could use it for a single day and his purpose of purchase went in vain. The OP denies for re-installing or replacing the money, hence causing hardship, injury, mental agony and loss of money to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

3. On issue of notice to OP through whatsapp by the complainant, the OP remains absent throughout and hence held Ex-parte.

4. The complainant filed affidavit evidence along with 3 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 in his contention.

5. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OP?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

6.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:- In the affirmative.

Point No.2:- Partly affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

7. Point No.1&2:- These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

8. As per the documents, evidence produced by the complainant, it clearly shows that the complainant purchased 100liter Dual Media Unit from the OP i.e, Easing Aqua Solutions on 25.06.2022, invoice No.EAQS250622 with delivery on 25.06.2022 i.e., the same day of purchase, for an amount of Rs.20,000/-. The OP’s representative did not install the machine properly. The complaint has suffered due to negligence of the OP in the installment of the machine, since the date of purchase. The OP fails to rectify the problem or replace the machine for the complainant even after several requests of complainant. The machine is not been used by the complainant even for a day. There is problem in the installation of the machine itself, the product is defective in nature, OP is liable to refund or replace the said product immediately. The OP shows negligence, deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice. Hence the OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.20,000/- along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.  Hence we answer Point No.1&2 accordingly.

9. Point No.3:- In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. Complaint filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, is hereby allowed in part.
2. OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.20,000/- to complainant.
3. OP is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.2,000/- towards litigation cost.
4. OP is directed to pay the Award amount within 60 days from the date of order failing which OP is directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the Award amount till realization.
5. Furnish the copies to both the parties without cost.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 17^th day of OCTOBER, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL