IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 27th day of December, 2014
Filed on 06.02.2014
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.35/2014
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Pradeep Kumar 1. Eureka Forbes Limited
Punnathukalil 32/1787 – A5, Tutus Towers
Pathirappally P.O. NH 47 Bye-pass Road
East Point School Road Padivattom, Edappally P.O.
Alappuzha – 682 000 Cochin – 24
(By Adv. V.N. Kiranlal)
2. Eureka Forbes Limited
B1/B2, 701, 7th Floor, Marathon
Next Gen, Marathon Innova, Off
Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower
Parel, Mumbai – 400 013, India
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant purchased a water purifier for an amount of Rs.11,990/- from the first opposite party manufactured by the second opposite party on 25.10.2011. The opposite parties assured prompt and punctual periodical services to the said machine and the opposite parties gave phone number to the complainant. The complainant called up the opposite parties on many occasions seeking service. Though opposite parties offered immediate service, they never visited the premises of the complainant. After one year from the date of purchase, the representative of the opposite parties approached the complainant and induced him to enter into an “Annual Maintenance Contract”. As per the assurance of the opposite parties for providing prompt service, the complainant entered into the said contract and paid an amount of Rs.4,130/- for the same. The period of the said contract was from 4.11.2012 to 3.11.2013, but the opposite parties never visited and never cleaned or replaced any parts of the said machine. The complainant further alleged that right from the purchase of the product it either malfunctioned or was nonfunctional. The complainant therefore suffered much mental agony and hence filed this complaint seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay the complainant back the price of the water purifier (Rs.11,990/-) along with a compensation of Rs.35,000/-.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties, but they did not file any version and subsequently they were set exparte.
3. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following points arose for consideration:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for?
4. Point Nos.1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a water purifier from the first opposite party manufactured by the second opposite party on 25.10.2011 for an amount of Rs.11,990/-. After one year from the date of purchase of the water purifier, the complainant entered into a service contract with the opposite parties after paying an amount of Rs.4,130/- for a period of one year from 4.11.2012 to 3.11.2013 for providing prompt service. But the opposite parties never cleaned or replaced any parts of the product. Also the product was not properly functioning. Due to this, the complainant suffered much mental agony and hence filed this complaint seeking refund of the price of the purifier along with compensation.
5. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Exts.A1 and A2 were marked. Ext.A1 is the original invoice dated 25.10.2011. From this it can be seen that the complainant has purchased the water purifier from the first opposite party for a total amount of Rs.11,990/- on 25.10.2011. Ext.A2 is the original invoice cum receipt for service contract. From this it can be seen that an amount of Rs.4130/- was paid for the service contract. The period is valid from 4.11.2012 to 3.11.2013.
6. According to the complainant, the opposite parties never provided any service to the complainant and also no parts of the said product was cleaned or replaced during the existing period of contract, even though the complainant contacted the opposite parties. But there is no evidence to prove that the complainant has contacted the opposite parties for providing service when the contract (Ext.A2) was live. The complainant filed this complain before the Forum on 6.2.2014 ie. after the expiry of the said contract. The complainant filed this complaint seeking refund of the price of the purifier. But nothing was produced to prove that the said product became defective during the warranty period. Hence we can’t direct the opposite parties to refund the price of the product. The documents produced were not sufficient to prove deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Since there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties has been proved, the question of compensation does not arise for consideration. Hence complaint is dismissed.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 27th day of December, 2014.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Original invoice dated 25.10.2011
Ext.A2 - Original invoice cum receipt for service contract
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/- Compared by:-pg/-
