Date of filing : 11-05-2011
Date of Disposal: 22-05-2012
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANANTAPUR.
PRESENT: - Sri T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com., B.L., President (FAC)
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L.,Male Member
Kum. M.Sreelatha, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Tuesday, the 22nd day of May, 2012
C.C.NO. 106 /2011
Between:
Chandrasekhar Azad
D.No.7-538, Rahamath Nagar
Anantapur. …. Complainant
Vs.
L.G.Shoppee
Ramakrishna Electronics
K.R.C.Complex, D.No.10-380 &
10-381, Ground & First floor,
Old Super Bazar Complex,
Subash Road, Near Nama Lodge
Anantapur. …. Opposite party
This case coming on this day for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri M.Nagesh and Sri S.Surendra Chary, advocates for the complainant and Sri B.Rajendra Prasad and Sri S.Gopi advocates for the opposite party and after perusing the material papers on record and after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Forum delivered the following:
O R D E R
Kum. M.Sreelatha,Lady Member: - This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party to direct him to pay a sum of Rs.12,700/- towards cost of the Refrigerator, Rs.2,000/- towards expenditure, Rs.2,000/- towards legal expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony total Rs.26,700/- with interest @ 24% p.a. till the date of payment and grant such other reliefs.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that: - The complainant purchased L.G.Company Refrigerator on 27-03-2010 for Rs.12,700/- from the opposite party and warranty period is one year and working very smoothly and the said Refrigerator worked properly only for few months and started giving troubles. Immediately the complainant approached the opposite party on 06-03-2011 and informed the same. After that the opposite party sent his mechanics and they did some repairs and expressed that it will work properly. But the Refrigerator giving some troubles and so the complainant handed over the same to the opposite party on 17-03-2011. The opposite party issued Job Sheet and promised that it will be ready within a 2 or 3 days, but it was not repaired. The complainant asked the same and there is no reply from the opposite party. Hence, the complainant got issued notice on 01-04-2011 to the opposite party but the opposite party failed to give any reply. The complainant purchased the Refrigerator with great hope and it is working properly and spent Rs.12,700/- and the opposite party did not respond properly even after receiving the notice. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Hence they are liable to pay a sum of Rs.26,700/- under deferent heads with future interest @ 24% p.a.
3. The opposite party filed counter alleging that the complainant purchased Refrigerator on 27-03-2010. The warranty is for one year only and the complainant enjoyed the Refrigerator nearly 11 months & 9 days and when warranty period is going to be expired he approached the opposite party with a complaint that the Refrigerator is not working properly. Immediately the opposite party sent the mechanics to the house of complainant and they rectified the problem and the mechanics reported it is working properly. Again on 17-03-2011 the complainant phoned to the opposite party and informed that the Refrigerator is giving trouble. The opposite party sent mechanics and the Refrigerator brought to shop for 2 days observation. On 20-03-2011 the opposite party phoned to the complainant and intimated that the Refrigerator is rectified and take back it after submitting Job Sheet issued to the complainant on 17-03-0211. But the complainant simply rejected and demanded to replace with a new one. The opposite party informed to main office at Kurnool and with their direction they tried to contact the complainant on several times but the inmates of the house informed that he is out of station and they will inform the same. But the complainant did not turn up to take back the Refrigerator and he issued legal notice. After receipt of the legal notice the opposite party contacted the complainant to take back the Refrigerator but he refused to receive the same and demanding for new one. The opposite party also mentioned that as per terms & conditions mentioned in the Invoice that the article sold is guaranteed by manufacturers only and the goods once delivered will not be taken back or exchanged. No replacement will be issued. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and the complainant intentionally filed this complaint to gain unlawfully. He wants new Refrigerator and his intention is only to harass the opposite party and defame the company in public by filing this type of complaint and the complaint is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties as the Head Office is situated at Kurnool and the opposite party is only a dealer. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs of the opposite party.
4. Basing on the above pleadings, the points that arise for consideration are:-
1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Whether the claim is bad for non-joineder of necessary parties?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled for any claim?
5. To what relief?
5. To prove the case of the complainant, the evidence on affidavit of the complainant has been filed and marked Exs.A1 to A4 documents. On behalf of the opposite party, evidence on affidavit of the opposite party has been filed and Ex.B1 is marked.
6. Heard both sides.
7. POINT NO.1:- The counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant purchased the Refrigerator on 27-03-2010 for a sum of Rs.12,700/- and its warranty period is one year. But the Refrigerator started giving trouble. So the complainant informed the opposite party on 06-03-2011 and got it repaired by the mechanic of the opposite party. But the Refrigerator started again giving troubles after one week of repairs and complained to the opposite party on 17-03-2011 and the mechanic of the opposite party took the Refrigerator to the shop for observation and they failed to return the same, hence issued legal notice under Ex.A3 and the complainant has no faith on opposite party as they provide rectified or new one. Hence he wants a sum of Rs.26,700/- with interest.
8. The opposite party argued that there is no deficiency of service on their part as the complainant himself failed to take back the rectified refrigerator as he intends to receive new one instead of rectified one and the complainant intentionally refusing to receive the refrigerator though he enjoyed the refrigerator for a period of 11 months and 9 days. The opposite party is ready to give rectified one whenever asked by the complainant after submitting Job Sheet. Hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as they are ready to give refrigerator with good condition and that this point is answered in favour of the opposite party.
9. POINT NO.2 :- The opposite party is argued that he is only dealer and its showroom selling the received goods from Head Office, Kurnool and the opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation as the complainant failed to join necessary parties.
10. POINT NO.3 :- The complainant is asking for refund of refrigerator amount , legal expenses and mental agony with interest for a sum of Rs.26,700/- in total.
11. The opposite party argued that though there is no liability on their part, they are ready to give repaired refrigerator with good condition to the complainant and they are not liable to give new as per invoice terms and conditions and no replacement of goods once sold. This point is answered in favour of the complainant as the opposite party agreed to give rectified refrigerator whenever asked by the complainant by submitting job sheet.
12. POINT NO.4 :- In the result the claim of the complainant is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to give rectified refrigerator in good working condition after repairing it within 15 days after receipt of the order and the complainant is directed to submit the Job sheet at the time of receiving the refrigerator.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, this the 22nd day of May, 2012.
Sd/ Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT ,
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM,
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT: ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOISITE PARTY
-NIL- - NIL-
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT
1. Ex.A1 – Original Invoice dt.27-03-2010 issued by the opposite party in favour of the
Complainant.
2. Ex.A2 - Job Sheet issued by the opposite party to the complainant.
3. Ex.A3 - Office copy of notice dt.01-04-2011 got issued by the complainant to the
Opposite party..
4. Ex.A4 - Postal acknowledgement signed by the opposite party.
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY
1. Ex.B1 – Xerox copy of itemized calls issued by the Vadafone Company.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM,
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR
