Delhi

West Delhi

CC/16/130

Vijay Kumar Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Electronic Paradise North - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jan 2017

ORDER

    CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, JanakPuri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                                        Date of institution:  16.02.2016  

Complaint Case. No.130/16                                                                                          Date of order:   21.01.2017                   

IN  MATTER OF

Vijay Kumar Sharma, R/o QTR. No. 1029, CRPF Quarter, Sect- 16B, Jyoti Kunj, Dwarka, New Delhi                                                                                                                     Complainant

VERSUS

Electronic Paradise (North), WZ-297, G-Block, Hari Nagar, Jail Road, New Delhi-110058                                                                                                                                                        Opposite party-1

 

Samsung India Electronics pvt ltd., 2^nd, 3^rd & 4^th Floor, Tower C, Vipul Tech Square, Golf Course Road, Sec-43, Gurgaon-122002                                                           Opposite party -2

 

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI,PRESIDENT

Brief facts of the present complaint are that Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma herein after referred as the complainant are that on 18.02.2015 the complainant purchased a LED model no. UA48H5100 on 18.02.2015 for sale consideration of Rs. 69,900/-from opposite party no. 1 manufactured by opposite party no. 2. The LED developed fault within few days from the purchase. The LED was repaired by Engineer of the opposite parties. But the LED again developed same fault within three months. The complainant lodged complaint with opposite party no. 1. Engineer of the opposite parties again visited the complainant and repaired the LED. On 02.02.2016 the same fault again developed. The complainant lodged complaint no. 4209320819 with opposite party no. 1. On 04.02.2016 Engineer of the opposite parties again came, checked the LED and told the complainant that panel of the LED is being replaced third time. Therefore, they will forward his complaint to higher authorities. The complainant after two days received a telephonic call from customer care of the opposite parties. Who told that LED of the complainant will be replaced but despite repeated complaints and inquiries the opposite parties neither repaired panel of the LED nor replaced the LED. Hence the present complaint for directions to the opposite parties for replacement of the LED or refund a sum of Rs. 69,900/- cost of the LED and pay compensation for mental and physical pain , agony and sufferings.

            Notice of the complaint was sent to the opposite parties. But despite service none appeared on behalf of opposite parties. The opposite parties were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 07.04.2016.

            Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma complainant in support of his complaint filed affidavit dated 22.08.2016. Wherein he again narrated facts of the complaint. He also relied upon invoice dated 16.12.2015. From perusal of the invoice it reveals that the complainant on 18.02.2015 purchased LED model no. UA48H5100 for sum of Rs. 69,900/- from opposite party no. 1 manufactured by opposite party no. 2.

We have heard the complainant and have gone through material on record carefully and thoroughly.

The version of the complainant, his affidavit and invoice dated 18.02.2015 have remained unrebutted and unchallenged. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted and unchallenged version of the complainant. The complainant from the unrebutted and unchallenged version, affidavit and invoice has been able to show that on 18.02.2015 he purchased LED model no. UA48H5100 from opposite party no. 1 manufactured by opposite party no. 2 for sum of Rs. 69,900/-. The LED developed fault within few days. The opposite parties replaced panel two times but again the LED developed fault. The matter was reported to opposite party no.1 vide complaint no. 4209320819. But they neither repaired  nor replaced the LED. The complainant has suffered loss of LED. He is also deprived to use the LED. Hence there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant is entitled for replacement of the LED with a new LED of same make and model and if LED of same make and model is not available to replace the LED with a new LED of upgraded model of same make and compensation for mental pain , agony and sufferings.

Therefore, we direct the opposite parties to replace the LED of the complainant with a new LED of same make and model and if LED of same make and model is not available to replace the LED with a new LED of upgraded model of same make. We further award compensation of Rs.5,000/- for mental pain, agony and suffering. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount.

Order pronounced on : 21.01.2017

• Compliance of the order be made within 20 days after receipt of the order.
• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                    (URMILA GUPTA)                                        (R.S.  BAGRI)

   MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                                                  PRESIDENT