Delhi

West Delhi

CC/15/770

B.S. KHURANA - Complainant(s)

Versus

EUREKA FORBS - Opp.Party(s)

16 Aug 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

         150-151; COMMUNITY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI

CASE NO.  770/15

B.S. KHURANA(ANNY MOTORS)

Present address:- A-354, VIKASPURI NEW DELHI-110018

 

VERSUS

EUREKA FORBS(DIVISIONAL MANAGER)

101-102, GH-8, PASCHIM VIHAR DDA MARKET

NEW DELHI-110087

                                     

O R D E R

PUNEET LAMBA, MEMBER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged by the complainant are that he placed order on 08.04.2014 for one Euro clean Pro Vaccum Cum Steam cleaner herein after referred as machine  and paid a sum of Rs. 24,990/- to OP. It is alleged that he received machine on 11.04.2014 for demonstration but the same was not functioning properly. The product in dispute was delivered on 02.05.2014 which also failed to work and returned to OP. It is alleged that the OP promised to replace the product in dispute and even the demo machine was returned to OP on 08.05.2014. The complainant communicated with OP several times to replace the defective machine or refund the amount but to no effect. Hence the present complaint for refund of sum of Rs. 24,990/- cost of machine with interest at 18% per annum and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on account of compensation for mental harassment.  

Despite notice OP failed to appear and was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 18.01.2017.

         When the complainant was asked to lead evidence, the complainant testified the contents of the complaint on oath. He also relied on annexures- A to C. 

We have heard LD. Counsel for complainant and have gone through the material carefully and thoroughly. 

  The main controversy is as to whether the complainant is entitled for the relief he claimed. From the perusal of the annexure –A it reveals that the quotation of machine was Rs. 24990/- which was paid by the complainant in cash and annexure –B and C reveals that replacement of machine was assured by OP. The complainant was able to establish his version through substantial documents on record, Which clearly reveals deficiency in services on part of OP. Despite notice OP chose not to appear and defend his version, therefore, we have no hesitation to believe the unrebutted and unchallenged version of complainant.  The complainant suffered not only mentally but financially also due to negligence and deficient services of OP he had to remain without machine even after payment. Hence OP is liable to refund the invoice amount of the product in dispute.

In view of above discussion and observations we direct OP to refund a sum of Rs. 24,990/- being cost of machine with interest @6% P.A. from the date of filing till actual realization  and also award a sum of Rs. 10,000/- on account of compensation for harassment and litigation expenses within 45 days of the receipt of the order. In case of default OP is liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till actual realization.

Copy of order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to record room.

Announced this _______16TH____AUG, 2019.

                                     

 

 (PUNEET LAMBA)                                                            (K.S. MOHI)                                                                       

     Member                                                                              President