Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 284.
Instituted on : 21.06.2018.
Decided on : 18.09.2019.
Kuldeep Singh age 50 years, s/o Sh. Udey Singh R/o Village Aasan, District Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- V.S.ElectrIc Work, H.No.38/9, Kishan Garh, Vasant Kunj, Delhi-70.
- Luminous Customer Service Center, Plot no.82, New Rajendra Colony, Pipal Wali gali, Opp. Khushboo Garden, Bhiwani Road, Rohtak-124001.
- Luminous Power Technologies Private Limited, Corporate Office: Plot No.150, Setor-44, Gurgaon, Haryana. Ph.-0124-4776700.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Ms. Raveena, Advocate for complainant.
Sh.R.S.Budhwar, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 & 3 already exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant has purchased an inverter and 2 batteries set from the opposite party No.1 on dated 05.01.2018. That on 25.05.2018, the battery became defective. The complainant made complaint to opposite party No.2 but it was replied that a wrong bill was issued by the opposite party no.1 and the same will be got rectified by the opposite party no.1 itself. That complainant met with the respondent no.1 so many times but no satisfactory reply was given. That there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed either to replace the battery or to refund the price of battery in question alongwith compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party No.1 appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that in fact the inverter and battery was sold vide bill no.433 dated 19.03.2017 instead of bill no.877 dated 05.08.2018. That complainant has misled the Hon’ble Forum by submitting the fake bill. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 and dismissal of complaint has been sought. However, opposite party No.2 & 3 did not appear and were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 20.08.2018 of this Forum.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C2 and closed his evidence on 14.05.2019. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.R1, document Ex.R1 and has closed his evidence on dated 08.07.2019.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. At the time of arguments, opposite party No.1 has stated that he is ready to replace the battery. Ld. counsel for the complainant made a statement that the complainant is ready to get replace the battery from Delhi. As such compliant is allowed and it is directed that complainant shall hand over the battery in question at the office of opposite party No.1 at Delhi and opposite party no.1 shall replace the battery in question with new one within one month from the date of decision.
6. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
18.09.2019.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
…………………………………
Tripti Pannu, Member.
