ORDER

BY SRI.H.R.SRINIVAS, PRESIDENT.

This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant U/S Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the Opposite Party (herein referred in short as O.P) alleging the deficiency in service in not installing CCTV and in not refunding the cost of the same and for recovery of the cost along with interest and other charges cost of litigation amounting to Rs.12,697/- and for other reliefs as the Commission deems fit.

2.      The brief facts of the complaint are that;

OP is manufacturer and seller of water purifiers, air purifiers, vacuum cleaners and security solutions, having its head office at Bombay and a branch at Bangalore.  Complainant decided to purchase CCTV camera for his house from OP by paying a sum of Rs.5,990/- on 24.12.2019.  The same was acknowledged by OP over the mobile.  On 1^st January 2020, representative of the OP visited the house and tried to install the camera.  Due to technical issue they could not do so, as the same was not compatible with 5G internet connection available in his house.  Hence the camera was returned to the OP as per the “Daily Activity Report” dated 01.01.2020.  On 4^th January 2020, he requested OP to refund the cost of the CCTV camera i.e., Rs.5,990/-.  Inspite of registering his complaint for refund, OP did not refund the same.  Email correspondence has taken place between him and OP.  Inspite of it OP has not refunded the said amount.  OP is bound to refund the same along with interest at 18% p.a., on the said amount, conveyance charge of Rs.1,000/- cost of typing and photocopies and CD Rs.500/-, expenses of the court Rs.5,000/- in all Rs.12,697/- is to be paid by the OP since there is deficiency in service in not refunding the amount and hence this complaint.

3.      Upon the service of notice, OP did not appear before the Commission and absented itself and hence placed exparte.

4.      In order to prove the case, complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments Heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

5.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT NO.1:            In the Affirmative

POINT NO.2:            Partly in the affirmative.

                                For the following.

REASONS

6.     POINT No.1 & 2:-

   Perused the complaint, affidavit evidence and the documents produced by the complainant.  The affidavit contends are nothing but reiteration of the contents of the complaint. Further complainant has produced Ex.P1 the message received over phone on 26^th December 2019 wherein OP has acknowledged for having received Rs.5,990/-.  Ex.P2 is the daily activity report wherein the act fiber 5G is not connecting the CCTV and is not compatible and it is also requested therein by the complainant to refund the entire amount.  Ex.P3 is the email sent to OP demanding refund and Ex.P4 is the reply given by OP informing that complaint has been registered and the same will be taken up with the Eureka Forbe department for the timely and speedy resolution and they will call back within 24 hours.  P5 is another letter wherein complainant has demanded for refund again.  P6 is the CD in respect of the telephonic conversation between the complainant and OP.

        7.     When all these are taken into consideration, and further the silence of the OP when notice of the complaint is served, amplifies that though OP has received the cost of the CCTV and failed to install the same to the house of the complainant due to technical reasons, it is the bounden duty of OP to refund the cost of the same.  Since the same has not been done, it amounts to unfair trade practice besides having an intention to gain unlawfully, which is to be deprecated.  Hence we answer Point No.1 in the affirmative and OP is liable to pay the cost of the CCTV i.e., Rs.5,990/- along with interest at 12% from 24.12.2019 till the payment of the entire amount and further Rs.500/- towards conveyance charges, Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses and Rs.1,000/- towards damages for causing mental agony and hardship and thus answer Point No.2 partly in the affirmative and pass the following;

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed in part with cost.
2. OP is directed to Rs.5,990/- along with interest at 12% from 24.12.2019 till the payment of the entire amount.
3.  Op is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.500/- towards conveyance charges, Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses, and Rs.1,000/- towards damages for causing mental agony and hardship.
4. OP is further directed comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
5. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

Note:You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this 30^th day of September 2020)

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

ANNEXURES

1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex P1: Copy of the receipt sent through mobile by OP

Ex P2: Copy of the daily activity report of OP

Ex. P3: Letter sent by me informing and requesting OP to reund the amount

Ex P4: Reply given by OP through email

Ex P5: Email correspondences

Ex P6: CD containing telephone conversation

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:

RW-1:  Exparte

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s

• NIL    -

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT