Present         (1)     Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                         President

                    (2)     Smt. Karishma Mandal,

                              Member

Date of Order : 31.03.2016  

                    Nisha Nath Ojha

1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-

1. To direct the opposite parties to refund the price of the Battery i.e. Rs. 4,100/-.
2. To pay Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) as compensation.
3. To pay Rs. 1,000/- ( Rs. One Thousand only ) as litigation costs.

2. The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-

The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a Exide battery vide annexure – 1 after paying price of Rs. 4,100/-. After purchasing the aforesaid battery the complainant noticed that the battery is not functioning well which has resulted in starting trouble of the vehicle. Thereafter in Sep 2009 he deposited the battery to opposite party no. 2 for replacing the same but again when in Oct 2009 after laps of one month 15 days the battery was handed over to him it was detected that the battery was not giving full charge and hence again on 3^rd April 2010 he again deposited the battery which was handed over to him after so called repair on 24^th May 2010 but when the battery was fixed in the vehicle the same problem continued and one of the staff of opposite party no. 2 stated that one cell of the battery is not functioning. Thereafter the complainant requested several times to opposite parties for changing the battery but no one has taken care for redressing the grievance of the complainant.

On behalf of opposite party no. 1 a written statement has been filed raising several objections such as without any expert test report the complaint of the complainant can not be accepted.

It has been further asserted that the complainant has not complied the condition mentioned in the warranty card and suppressed facts.

It has been further asserted that the complainant has mentioned that after few days problem arose and he complained to opposite party no. 2 but the exact date has not been given. On behalf of opposite parties several citations have been mentioned in support of opposite party no. 1.

So far opposite party no. 2 is concerned when despite registered notice he did not appeared then vide order dated 11.03.2014 valid service of Tamila was declared on opposite party no. 2 and several adjournments were given for filing of written statement but no written statement has been filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2. Hence this case was heard in absence of opposite party no. 2.

Heard the learned counsel for complainant, opposite party no. 1 in detail.

It is the case of the complainant that after few days of purchase of the battery vide annexure – 1 when the battery did not work well then he approached the opposite party no. 2 who had returned the battery after keeping the same for some time stating therein that the defects have been corrected. Thereafter the complainant again deposited the battery before opposite party no. 2 twice and opposite party no. 2 had returned the battery after stating that the defect have been removed. These facts clearly goes to prove from annexure – 2, 3 and 4 also because in annexure – 4 the complainant has narrated all his grievance to opposite party no. 1. The complainant has to come to this Forum for redressal of his grievance for such a petty matter which shows his aguish.

The fact asserted by complainant has not been categorically denied by opposite party no. 1 rather presumption has been drawn that the complainant has suppressed material of facts. The existence of annexure – 1, 2, 3 and 4 have not been denied which clearly proves deficiency on the part of opposite parties.

So far opposite party no. 2 is concerned, he did not choose to appear for the reason best known to him because opposite party no. 2 could have been denied the allegation of the complainant effectively as the complainant has approached him physically several times.

For the reason stated above we direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to return the price of the battery i.e. Rs. 4,100/- vide annexure – 1 to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite parties will have to pay an interest @ 12% on the above mentioned amount till its final payment.

We further direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two months.

It is made clear that at the time of receiving the aforesaid amount the complainant will return the battery to opposite parties purchased vide annexure – 1 if it is in his possession.

Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.

                              Member                                                                                        President