Kerala

Idukki

CC/68/2022

Manoj M - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indian Battery shop & Auto Electrical - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.K M Sanu

22 Mar 2023

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 28/04/2022

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 22^nd day of March 2023

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.68/2022

Between

Complainant                                :   Manoj M.,

                                                         Muthuplackal House, Peringassery P.O.,

                                                         Udumbannoor – 685 595.

                                                         (By Adv.K.M.Sanu)

                                                           And

Opposite Party                            : 1 . The Manager/Proprietor,

                                                            Indian Battery Shop & Auto Electricals,

                                                            Thodupuzha P.O., Thodupuzha.

                                                            (By Adv.Prince J.Pananal)

                                                      2 . The Managing Director,

                                                           Luminous Power Technologies Pvt Ltd.,

                                                           Plot No.50, Sector 44,

                                                           Gurgavon, Hariyana. 

                                                             

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

 

Complainant filed this complaint under S.35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  Brief facts of this complaint are discussed hereunder:-

 

1 . Complainant has purchased an inverter worth Rs.25,000/- from opposite parties on 31/12/2017.  The inverter was of DSPSINE company and it’s the battery was of Luminos Company.

2 .  At the time of purchase, opposite party has given bill and warranty card with 24 months warranty for inverter and 48 months for battery.

 

                                                                                                  (Cont...2)

-2-

3 . But, it was damaged within years.  Complainant has informed it to opposite party and accordingly they have came and inspected, and the charging mode was changed by them.  For that, opposite party has received Rs.250/- from complainant.

4 . But, after 3 months, the inverter was again inactive eventhough it was informed to opposite party, they have came here for inspection after some days only.  Thus it was serviced, but after some days, again it was damaged complainant has again informed it, thus  opposite party has inspected it and replied that it’s the battery is damaged.  Thus, the battery was changed temporarily with another battery of India Cromptom Company instead of Luminous Company.  At that time, opposite party has promised that, they would give Luminous Company battery as per the warranty without delay, but even after days, opposite party didn’t give the battery of Luminous Company.  The temporary battery was active in some weeks only.  So now the inverter is not in working condition.  There is warranty for the battery until 31/12/2021, hence opposite party is liable to give new battery of Luminous Company.  Moreover, opposite party has also not given the original battery which was returned from complainant till this date.  Despite the warranty period, opposite party demands money for new battery.  This is deficiency in service on the part of them.  Complainant alleges that he is entitled to get compensation from opposite party.  Hence he has prayed the following reliefs.

1. Opposite parties may be directed to fix the battery of Luminous Company into the inverter in free of cost.
2. Opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost.

Upon notice from this Commission, opposite parties have entered appearance through counsel.  No written version is filed.  Thereafter, this

                                                                                              (Cont...3)

-3-

case was posted for evidence of complainant .  Complainant has filed proof affidavit and he was examined as PW1.  Exts.P1 and P2 were marked. Opposite party has not filed written version.  Hence, evidence closed and heard the counsels for both parties.  Thereafter, it was taken for orders.  Now the points which arise for consideration are :-

1. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2. If so, what reliefs are entitled to?

Points are considered together

We have gone through the evidence on records.  As per Ext.P1, it is seen  that complainant has purchased an inverter with warranty of 24 months and a battery of 48 months for Rs.25,000/- along with trolley from first opposite party on 31/12/2017.  The allegation of complainant is that the battery was damaged within the prescribed warranty period, but opposite party is not ready to give the new battery as per the warranty.  On the perusal of Ext.P2, we find that complainant has purchased ItTT 1800N Model Battery and as per warranty period conditions in case of damage/replacements, between 31-42  months are new battery at 20% discount on prevailing maximum retail price is to be provided.  On cross examination of complainant, he deposed that substituted battery was given on August 2020.  So, we are of the considered view that the battery was damaged before the month of August 2020, hence it is in the warranty period conditions between 31-42 months as per Ext.P2.  Because, it was purchased on 31/12/2017.  From the date of purchase, the battery was damaged before 42 and after 30 months.  Accordingly, complainant is entitled to get the new battery with 20% discount on prevailing maximum retail price.  Moreover, we have understood that complainant was  ready only to pay Rs.8000/- for buying new battery of Luminous Company as per the warranty conditions.

                                                                                              (Cont...4)

-4-

This was admitted by complainant in cross examination even though opposite party has submitted another company battery as temporarily.  Complainant deposed that it was not in a working condition.  Complainant demands that the battery replacement should get with free of cost.  But, as per Ext.P2 warranty conditions are applicable here.  Hence, it cannot be possible.  Moreover, there is no evidence to show that at which date the battery was damaged.  Moreover, it is not evident that the battery was damaged within the warranty condition which said replacement with free of cost.

Opposite parties have not filed written version.  However, they have cross examined the complainant.  complainant has deposed that when he approached opposite party with 8000/- rupees and warranty card, they replied that they are not ready to give the battery of Luminous Company, instead of that they would give another company battery.  We are of the view that this is deficiency in service on the part of them.  In the result, complaint is allowed in part as hereunder.

1.  Opposite parties are directed to give new battery of Luminous Company to complainant after  receiving Rs.8000/- from him.
2. Opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.3000/- as litigation cost to complainant.

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 Pronounced by this Commission on this the 22^nd  day of March, 2023.

 

                                                                                          Sd/-                                                                                 

                                                                                SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER                                                                                                             

                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                        SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT                                                                                                 

                                                                                                     Sd/-                                                                            

                                                                              SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

                                                                                                                      (Cont...5)

-5-

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1-Manoj M.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1  - Receipt of Indian Battery Shop and Auto Electricals dated 31/12/2017

Ext.P2  - Warranty card

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

 

                                                                                               Forwarded by Order  

 

 

                                                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR