BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.

                                                          Complaint Case no. 715 of 2019      

                                                          Date of Institution: 19.12.2019

                                                          Date of Decision:   18.09.2023. 

Sadhu Singh, aged about 54 years son of Sh. Gian Singh, resident of House No. 1562, Sector 20, HUDA, Sirsa.

                                                                   ………Complainant.

                                      Versus

Jagdambe Car Accessories, opposite Maruti Show Room, Dabwali Road, Sirsa, through its proprietor/ partner or authorized person.

                    ……… Opposite party.

          Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before:       SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR………. PRESIDENT

     SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………..MEMBER                              

Present:         Sh. Mantaj Singh, Advocate for complainant.

        Sh. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for opposite party.

ORDER:-

          In brief, the case of complainant is that opposite party (herein after referred as OP) deals in the sale of seat cover, mat, stereo, speaker, woofer etc. The complainant had purchased seat cover, bucket fit, horn and mat 8D from the op for the total price of Rs.6000/- vide cash memo no. 3041 dated 23.07.2019. That op had given one year guarantee/ warrantee for Horn of the car and had given every type of assurance in this regard. It is further averred that after few days of the purchase of horn of the car, the same stopped working and now it has stopped working totally. That complainant went to the shop of op and requested the op to replace the said horn with new one but op continued put off the matter by one way or the other and ultimately op refused to replace the same without assigning any cogent reason for the same. That thereafter complainant got issued a legal notice dated 25.09.2019 upon the op but to no effect and has totally refused to admit the claim of complainant about a week back. The op has caused unnecessary harassment, mental agony and deficiency in service towards the complainant. That op has given forged/ fake bill to the complainant and has sold sub standard material to him. Hence, this complaint.

2.       On notice, op appeared and filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, estoppal, mis joinder and non jonder of necessary parties and concealment of material facts. On merits, it is submitted that no guarantee or warrantee of any item was given by the op to the complainant especially for the horn in question which was disclosed to the complainant at the time of its purchasing. Hence, such assurances were never given to the complainant by the op. It is further submitted that complainant visited the premises of op and told about not working of the horn in question on which after inspecting the horn, it was found that the said horn was affected by water. Then it was again specifically disclosed to the complainant that there is no guarantee or warranty of horn in question. But in view of reputation of the op firm in the market as well as goodwill with the complainant, the op was every time ready to get the said horn repaired at its own level and complainant was asked to hand over the said horn to the complainant but the complainant never handed over the said horn to the op nor he came to the op thereafter at any point of time whereas the op was ready to do needful to solve the issue of the complainant. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.

3.       The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1, copy of legal notice Ex.C2 and bill Ex.C3.

4.       On the other hand, op did not lead any evidence despite availing several opportunities.

5.       We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.

6.       From the bill dated 23.07.2019 Ex.C3 issued by op to the complainant, it is evident that complainant had purchased seat cover and bucket fit for an amount of Rs.4000/-, horn for an amount of Rs.800/- and Mat 8D for an amount of Rs.1200/-. So, it is proved on record that complainant had purchased horn in question from op for amount of Rs.800/-. The complainant alleges defect in the horn in question just after few days of its purchase. Since the matter is of petty in nature i.e. for little amount of Rs.800/- and as per version of op complainant never handed over the said horn to the op for repair, therefore, it will be in the fitness of things if a direction is given to the op for repair of the horn subject to the handing over of the same to the op by the complainant.

7.       In view of the above, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party to repair the horn in question and to make it defect free without any costs subject to handing over of same by complainant to the op. The complainant is directed to hand over the horn to the complainant or to take vehicle to the op for repair of horn within 15 days from today and thereafter op will repair the horn in question within further period of 15 days. In case it is found that said horn is not repairable, then op will return the amount of Rs.800/- to the complainant within above said period of 15 days. However, parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced:                   Member      Member                President,

Dated: 18.09.2023.                                               District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Commission, Sirsa.