View 2032 Cases Against Electronic
AISHWARYARAJ SAHAI filed a consumer case on 24 Aug 2018 against EP ELECTRONIC PARADISE P LTD. in the West Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/17/265 and the judgment uploaded on 24 Aug 2018.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, Janak Puri, New Delhi – 110058
Date of institution: 04.05.2017
Complaint Case. No.265/17 Date of order: 24.08.2018
IN MATTER OF
Aishwaryaraj Sahai, Plot no.168, Block A, Street No.12, Bhagwati Garden Extension, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059
New and current Address:-
Aishwaryaraj Sahai, B-1/62, flat no.15, Sewak Park, Uttam Nagar, New Dellhi-59 Complainant
VERSUS
M/S EP Electronic Paradise Pvt. Ltd., B-238, G floor, Main Najafgarh Road, Uttam Nagar, Near Metro Pillar No. 654, Delhi-59
Opposite party
ORDER
PUNEET LAMBA, MEMBER
The present complaint is filed u/s 12 of the CPA against the Op for deficiency in services. Briefly the case of above named complainant is that he purchased two air conditioners of make and model Haier HW-12CH3EN for sale consideration of Rs. 19,500/- each vide invoice no. UTN/R 2753/2016-17 and UTN/R 2754/2016-17 dated 25.03.2017 from OP. The complainant paid Rs. 8,700/- through credit cards, sum of Rs.15056/- and Rs. 15,244/- were financed through Bajaj consumer finance ltd. He also paid Rs. 1,000/- installation charges and Rs. 400/- cartage charges. The ACs were installed by the OP when the complainant was away at office. When the complainant saw the installed AC he was shocked as the ACs were rebranded and sticker of Haier was pasted and they were also not working properly. The complainant found that the ACs were of Videocon and not of Haier for which he paid the full amount. Thereafter immediately the complainant informed Mr. Jatin manager of OP about the same. He expressed his apologies and promised to exchange and replace the new one within 30 minutes and told the complainant not to use the product as the new and genuine products will soon be delivered. But the Op failed to deliver the new product despite several telephonic communication by the complainant. The complainant then lodged complaint with the Haier call center and it was informed by the Haier that the product is not of make and model Haier. The OP by adopting unfair trade practice sold old and repaired ACs and there is deficiency in service on its part. The Op despite several communications sent through email as well as speed post letters failed to reply and redress the grievance of the complainant. The op by false representation, adopting unfair trade practice and deficient in providing services is liable to replace the old used and repaired ACs and compensation for mental and physical harassment.
Hence the present complaint for directions to OP to replace the old used and repaired air conditioner with new Haier air conditioner of one ton capacity and also pay compensation on account of mental agony harassment and litigation expenses.
Notice of the complaint was sent to the OP but none put in appearance on behalf of OP. Therefore, OP was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 18.08.2017.
When the complainant was asked to lead evidence he tendered his affidavit of evidence testifying all the facts stated in the complaint. He relied on invoice no. UTN/R 2753/2016-17 and UTN/R 2754/2016-17 dated 25.03.2017, payment slip of credit card, copies of statement of account from Bajaj Consumer finance ltd., copies of sms, copy of email dated 31.03.2017, speed post letter dated 28.03.2017, receipt of speed post, delivery report, screenshot of service report and photo of front panel showing Videocon beneath Haier logo.
We have heard complainant in person and have gone through the affidavit and records filed by the complainant.
The controversy is as whether the ACs delivered by the OP are of some other make and not of Haier for which the complainant had paid. The complainant has placed on record sms of Haier company which indicates that the product in dispute is not of make and model Haier. Despite the complainant paying full consideration for a specific product the same was not delivered to him by Op. The complainant is able to show that despite his best efforts and follow ups op failed to redress his grievance.
The op chose not to defend its interest despite court notice. The version of the complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged and we have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve the version of the complainant which is on oath. The complainant has been able to make out his case which is substantiated with sufficient material on record. Hence we are of the considered view OP is liable to refund the invoice amount, installation charges and cartage charges and also liable to pay compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.
Keeping in view the above discussion we are of opinion that Op has adopted unfair trade practice and there is deficiency in service in its part Therefore, we allow the complaint by awarding Rs. 40,400/- the total amount paid by the complainant and Rs.5,000/- compensation on account of mental pain, agony and harassment. It is further ordered that before any payment is released to the complainant the old ACs along with the accessories shall be returned to OP. Order accordingly.
Order pronounced on :- 24.08.2018
(PUNEET LAMBA) (K.S. MOHI) MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.