JUDGMENT
Shri A.K.Patra,President
The facts of the complaint is that, the complainant has purchased an” Eureka Forbes bold wet and dry Vacuum Cleaner” from the Opp.Party No.1 for a sum of Rs.5999/-vide Tax Invoice No.#FAIFEW2300042045 dt.04/10/2022 which was delivered on 7.10.2022. The delivery executive assured to provide demo and installation of the product through voice call but they did not provide any service after delivery of the product. When the complainant contacted with the Flipchart customer care executive they assured to install the same within 2-5 days of delivery of the product. Further the complainant stated that, the complainant was dissatisfied with the size of the product which is he expressed before the delivery executive as the pr5oduct is not compatible for a regular cleaning purpose due to its big in size and heavy in weight. Hence, in view of the above reason the complainant does not want this product and he want to return the same but the Opp.Party No.1 is not ready to take back the said product. Hence, complainant inter alia alleging deficiency in service & unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops.
The complainant prayed for an order directing the OP No.1 to take back the said product /Vacuum Cleaner refunding the cost price of the product and to direct the Ops to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and harassment.
On being notice, the Opp.Parties appeared through their advocate Sri Kunal Kumar Behera but failed to file their written version.The O.P No.2 neither appeared nor filed their written though notice through registered post is served properly as such we proceeded the matter in absence of any written reply of the Ops and decided the case on merit as per the material available on record
It is the case of the complainant in brief that, after delivery of the product the delivery executive of the Ops assured to install the Vacuum Cleaner/product and to provide necessary service but in spite of repeated approaches the Ops failed to provide the service as require by the complainant. Further the complainant also expressed his dissatisfaction with the above product and requested the Ops to return back the same but the Ops did not listen to the complainant though there is return option if the complainant is dissatisfied. It is further contended that ,though there is no manufacturing defect in the article purchased by the complainant but when the complainant expressed his unwillingness to keep the product purchased by him and there is return policy available with the purchase of the product , the Ops deliberately denied to take back the same, certainly caused deficiency in service on the part of the Ops . Further , the Ops did not contested the case and failed to file their written reply as such , in absence of any denial from the side of the Ops, we believed the allegations of the complainant as true .The Ops also failed to file their evidence on affidavit as prescribed under C.P.Act though sufficient opportunities has been given.
Sec. 2(11)of C.C Act 2019 :- Deficiency in Service means “ any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality , nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service”.
Here in this case ,after delivery of the product/ the vacuum cleaner, the complainant expressed his dissatisfaction and wanted to return back the same but the Ops did not turn up to take back the same and even failed to provide “after sale service” to the complainant. The complainant purchased/ the vacuum cleaner, for his personal use by paying an amount of Rs.5999/-but could not enjoy it , the complainant’s wish of enjoyment of the product defeated as the OPs failed to provide “ after sale service” which amounts to deficiency in service & unfair trade practice on the part of the O.ps certainly caused financial loss and mental agony to the complainant need to be compensated .
Hence, in view of the aforesaid discussion, it is concluded that the opposite parties are deficient in their service & performed unfair trade practice .Therefore, the O.Ps are liable to refund the amount of the product and also they are liable to pay compensation for mental agony along with cost of litigation to the complainant . Hence, we allowed the complaint partly and dispose of the matter with the following directions.
ORDER
The Opp.Party No. 1 is directed to refund the sale price of the product i.e. amount of Rs.5999/- with 9% interest from the date of filling of this complaint i.e. 17.10.2022 till its payment to the complainant and take back the vacuum cleaner from the complainant and to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1000/- towards cost of litigation. The matter is disposed of with the direction to the O.P. No. 1 to make the payment to the complainant within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the OP 1 is liable to pay @ Rs 200/-per day to the complainant as punitive damage till its realization. Dictated & corrected by me.
President
I agree
Member
Pronounced in the open forum today on this day of 13th July ,2023 under the seal and signature of this forum. The pending application if any is also disposed off accordingly.
Free copy of this order be supplied to the parties for their perusal or party may download the same from the Confonet be treated as copy served to the parties. Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
