DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 28th day of June 2019
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R, President
: Sri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member Date of Filing: 13/02/2019
CC/38/2019
Gopalakrishnan.P.P, - Complainant
“Krishna”,
Near Labour School,
Ezhakkad Post – 678 631.
Palakkad Dist.
(By Adv.P.B.Harris)
Vs
Sampath, - Opposite party
Ambals Cable Vision,
Sumi Buildings,
Chungam, Mundur.
O R D E R
By Smt.Shiny.P.R, President
Brief facts of complaint
Complainant has purchased NET LINK modem for FTTTH FIBRO ULD 777 connection from Ambal Cable Vision as per the direction of BSNL Palakkad. JTO, BSNL, Mundur instructed him to pay Rs.3,000/- towards the installation charges for ONU with wifi router voice. As per the instruction of BSNL complainant had paid Rs.3,000/- to the opposite party. Even though complainant insisted for invoice for modem, opposite party provided blank guarantee card without any details or company stamp. Several times complainant requested for invoice, but the opposite party did not provide the invoice. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing opposite party to
- provide proper invoice for the modem,
- provide proper guarantee card duly signed and stamped
- provide invoice for the service charge and
- pay Rs.4,100/- as claim, transportation and other expenses.
Complaint was admitted and notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite party accepted the notice. But he did not appear before the Forum. Hence name called, absent, set ex-parte.
Complainant filed chief affidavit. Ext.A1 to A3 were marked from the side of complainant.
The following issues are taken into consideration
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
- If so what is the relief?
Issues 1 and 2
We have perused the documents filed before the Forum. Ext.A1 and A3 show that complainant had taken a FTTTH FIBRO ULD 777 connection BSNL and purchased a modem from opposite party as per the instruction of BSNL. Ext. A2 shows that the opposite party has given a blank quarantine card to the complainant for the purchase of NETLINK. Every manufacturer or dealer has the liability to provide proper guarantee card or invoice to the customers. In the present case from the available evidence adduced by the complainant it is revealed that opposite party did not provide invoice and proper guarantee card to the complainant. This act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service. As the opposite parties remained ex-parte, the evidence tendered by the complainant stands unchallenged. In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that opposite party has the liability to provide proper invoice and guarantee card to the complainant.
In the result we allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to provide invoice and guarantee card to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.
If the opposite party did not comply the above order within one month from the date of order complainant is entitled to get Rs.4,100/-(Rupees Forty Thousand One hundred only) from the opposite party; failing which the complainant is entitled to realize 9% interest p.a from the opposite party on the amount due to him from the date of this order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 28th day of June 2019.
Sd/- Shiny.P.R
President
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Copy of letter received from JTO, BSNL, Mundur.
Ext.A2- Copy of Warranty card issued by Ambal Cable Vision.
Ext.A3 – Copy of acknowledgement from BSNL, Palakkad No.79062 dated 10/11/2018.
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Nil
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost : NIL.
