District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum

Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal

(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2^nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)

Telefax: (03522)-270013

Present          

Shri Sambhunath Chatterjee              - President

Miss. Swapna Saha                            - Member

Shri Siddhartha Ganguli                      - Member

Consumer Complaint No. 83/2013

Mrs. Jyotsna Sarkar

W/o Late Birendra Lal Sarkar

Ghosh Para, Chakbhabani

P.O. & P.S.: Balurghat,

Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur                      …………………Complainant(s)

V-E-R-S-U-S

1.   M/s. D.N. Enterprises

      Town Club Market, Room No. 25

      Nelson Mandela Sarani,

      P.O. & P.S.: Balurghat,

      Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur – 733101.

2.   M/s. Exide Industries Ltd.

      Regd. Office : 59-E Chowringhee Road,

      Kolkata – 700 020.            …………………Opposite Party / Parties

For complainant          ………………  - In person      

For OP No.1               ……………… - Shri Bapi Moulick, Ld. Adv.

For OP No. 2              ………….…   -  None.

Date of Filing                                       : 13.11.2013

Date of Disposal                                 : 30.07.2015

                                                                                                Contd…P/2

Judgment & Order  dt. 30.07.2015

            The complainant has filed this case against the OPs that the complainant purchased Inverter from M/s. D.N. Enterprises on 8.10.2009, that the batteries were found defective and the complainant had earlier filed a case against the OPs and during the pendency of the said case a compromise was arrived at and of OP-2 replaced the batteries by extending the warranty period for 24 months further from the date of said settlement.

            On the basis of the said fact the said case was withdrawn by the complainant.

            It is the contention of the complainant that again the said defect has arisen in respect of batteries for which the said fact was brought to the notice of the company but no step was taken from the side of the OPs for which the complainant has filed this case.

            The Summons was served upon the OPs but they did not turn up for which the case has been taken up for ex-parte hearing.

            During the hearing of the case the complainant has not engaged any lawyer but one Jyotsna Sarkar has appeared on behalf of the complainant. During the time of hearing on our query as to how she came to the conclusion of the case that the batteries were not functioning properly. Since, OPs have not turn up and paper was shown on behalf of the complainant. Before filing of this case a complaint was lodged to the company and the company’s representative examined the batteries, but he did not find any defect as such no action was taken on behalf of the OPs and practically they have ignored the notice served upon them since they realized that no defect was there in the batteries and as such OPs did not contest the case.

            In order to prove that the batteries were defective, the complainant, though, has not come before this Forum but she represented by another person namely Shukla Sarkar. Though she was not authorized by the complainant to take up the matter on her behalf, she filed a petition after conclusion of hearing the ex-parte of the matter praying for appointment of an expert to examine the said batteries. After getting a report from the expert the case is to be disposed of as prayed for on behalf of the complainant.

            From the materials on record we find that batteries were purchased in the year 2009 and those were replaced in the year 2012 and since no defect was found in those batteries as such the OPs did not contest the case. It is the habit of the complainant to file case one after another in order to delay the disposed of the matter the said petition  has  been filed. Though, the  complainant  has  not  filed  any

                                                                                                Contd…P/3

petition but on her behalf a petition has been filed praying for appointment of an expert, after conclusion of ex-parte hearing, as such the same cannot be entertained at this stage.

            Since, the case was filed on a hypothetical basis without any substantive ground for filing of the said case, accordingly, we hold that the case has got no merit to be allowed.

             Hence, it is

                                                O R D E R E D

            that the instant petition of complaint CC No.83/2013 is dismissed on ex-parte.

            Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.

            Dictated & corrected

            ………Sd/-….…….                                                    

            (Sambhunath Chatterjee)                                                      

                President                                                                

            We concur,

            ……Sd/-..……                                                            ………Sd/-……..

              (S. Saha)                                                            (S. Ganguli) 

               Member                                                                Member

1. Date when free copy was issued                         ……………………
2. Date of application for certified copy       ……………………
3. Date when copy was made ready            ……………………
4. Date of delivery                                        ……………………

FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]

1. Mode of dispatch                                ……………………
2. Date of dispatch                                  ……………………

-x-