Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/402/2013

B.Ramachandran - Complainant(s)

Versus

Eureka Forbes Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

K.V.Shanmuganathan

29 Nov 2021

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                              Date of Complaint Filed: 10.12.2013

                                                                                                                                                              Date of Reservation: 10.11.2021

                                                                                                                                                              Date of Order: 29.11.2021

                                                                                                       

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH)

 

Present:

                  Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.                                  : President

                 Thiru. T. Vinodh Kumar, B.A., B.L.                                           : Member

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.402/2013

MONDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

                                

B.Ramachandran,

S/o. G.Balasubramanian,

New No.50, Old No.21,

Vembuli Subedar Street,

Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.

                                                                                                                    .. Complainant.                                                                     ..Versus..

 

M/s.Eureka Forbes Limited,

Rep.by its Managing Director,

New No.31, Old No.14,

First Floor, Burkit Road,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

J.Srinivasan, (Head)

Customer Response Centre,

New No.8/88, Ground Floor, Valluvar Street,

pallavaram, Chennai -43.                                                                  ..  Opposite parties.

******

 

Counsel for the complainant                         : M/s. K.V.Shanmuganathan,Adv.,

Counsel for the 1st opposite party               : M/s. K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi. Adv.,

Counsel for the 2nd opposite party             : Exparte

 

            On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

2.Pronounced by the President Thiru. R.V.R. Deenadayalan, B.A., B.L.

            The complainant has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and to repay a sum of Rs.10,500/- paid by the complainant and take back the machine.

3. The complainant submitted his proof affidavit and written argument on the side of the complainant, documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 were marked.  The 1^st opposite party has submitted his written version and proof affidavit as his evidence but no document filed and also written argument filed. Though sufficient opportunity given by this commission to the 2^nd opposite party he did not turn up before commission to file written version and therefore the 2^nd opposite party was set ex-parte.

            4. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

On 15.01.2013 the complainant approached the first opposite party who is M/s Eureka Forbes Limited for effecting repairs of vacuum Cleaner purchased by him.  At that time, the 2nd opposite party who is the head of the customer Response Centre of the 1st opposite party canvassed about Air Purifier Machine and offered to reduce the price of the machine from 10,990/- to 10,500/- and also offered to give the following compliments.

a) Gift Card worth Rs.2500/-

b) One Umbrella

c) Free delivery at our home and life time free service

d) One floor cleaner mat for the old vacuum cleaner

On believing the representative made by the 2^nd opposite party the complainant instantly paid Rs.10,500/- to the price of the machine through his SBI Credit Card and requested the 2nd opposite party to install the machine in his home on 19.01.2013.  After 25 days later the opposite party had delivered a package, contents on which is not known to complainant at his home.  The delivery boy informed the complainant that the opposite parties will send a trained person to install the machine within couple of days. However opposite parties did not send anyone to install the same.  Despite several calls made by the complainant, the opposite parties had not installed the machine purchased by the complainant.  Hence this complaint.

 

5. Witten Version of  1^st Opposite Party in brief:-

 

This opposite party is only a marketer, seller and service provider to the customers. The allegation that at the time of purchase of the Air Purifier Machine the opposite party assured that they will give few compliments listed as

a) Gift Card worth Rs.2500/-

b) One Umbrella

c) Free delivery at our home and life time free service

d) One floor cleaner mat for the old vacuum cleaner

all the above compliments shows wish list of the complainant but which was not assured by the opposite parties except the clause c) i.e.Free delivery at our home and life time free service at the company service center.  Rest of the expected wish list provided by the complainant neither assured nor promised by the opposite parties. It is further stated that Air Purifier machine need not required any installation, it requires only demonstration.  The product is a portable one it can be moved from one room to another room to purify the air.  The purpose of the product is to observe the negative ions from the air and release positive ions which results in breathing good air. Even before the purchase 2^nd opposite party demonstrated the operation of air purifier.  After sales, once again the opposite parties were ready to provide the demonstration, but the complainant not allowed.  The complainant told them that if you don’t bring the compliment viz as a)Gift Card worth Rs.2500/-b)One Umbrella c) Free delivery at our home and life time free serviced and d) One floor cleaner mat for the old vacuum cleaner. He will not permit to enter into his house.  Moreover it is only a concocted story that the machine was not installed by the opposite parties. Hence it is requested to dismiss the complaint.

6.The points for consideration are:-

1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get reliefs as claimed in the complaint?

3) To what relief, the complainant is entitled?

7. Point No.1:-

 

It is admitted by both the parties that the complainant has purchased Air Purifier Machine from the 1st opposite party for Rs.10,990/- to that effect Ex.A1 receipt was given by the 1st opposite party to the complainant. After receiving amount the opposite party sent a machine on 10.02.2013 that is 25 days later and the same was admitted by the opposite party in his written version.  At the same time there is no proof submitted by the opposite party to say that Air Purifier Machine need not required any installation, it requires only demonstration. Even after sent the package to the complainant no demonstration was made by the opposite party and the reason stated in the written version as that the complainant was not permitted to allow their people for demonstration in his house in not acceptable one.

8. In this case the 2^nd opposite party who is the head customer Response centre.  After filing this complaint the 2^nd opposite party has not appearing before this commission even after receiving the notice from this commission and has not appeared neither himself and nor through his Advocate. The 1^st opposite party also filed his written version for himself and not on behalf of the 2^nd opposite party, which clearly shows that there is no valid ground to dispute the averments of the complaint made against the 2nd opposite party. Further there is no proof submitted by the 1^st opposite party that Air Purifier Machine need not required any installation and that the opposite party has failed to submit any proper evidence and relevant documents to show that the complainant not allowed the representatives to make demo in the complainant house.  Considering all these facts, we found that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service on their part.  Accordingly point No.1 is answered.

9. Point Nos.2 & 3:-

 

We have discussed and decided that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service on their part. Hence the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation to the complainant. Accordingly point No.2 & 3 are answered.

 

In the result this complaint is allowed as prayed far. The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,500/- (Rupees ten thousand and five hundred only) towards the cost of the machine after get back the machine which was packaged to the complainant dated 10.02.2013 and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/-(twenty five thousand only) towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony caused to the complainant.

The opposite party shall pay the above amounts within three months from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall recover the same with interest at the rate of 9% till the date of payment.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on this  the  29^th  day of November  2021.

 

                VINODH KUMAR                                                           R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN                                                                                       

    MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT

List of document filed by the complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	15.01.2013	Receipt issued by the opposite party	Xerox
Ex.A2	27.02.2013	Legal notice caused on behalf of the complainant to the opposite parties 1 &2	Xerox
Ex.A3	05.03.2013	Acknowledgement from 1st opposite party	Xerox
Ex.A4	05.03.2013	Acknowledgement from 2nd opposite party	Xerox

List of document filed by the opposite party:-

No documents

 

 

 T.VINODKUMAR                                                       R.V.R.DEENADAYALAN                                                                                       

  MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT