BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 25th day of April 2014
Filed on : 04/03/2014
PRESENT:
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.
Smt. Beena Kumari V.K. Member
CC.No.154/2014
Between
Sajeev P.R., : Complainant
Kanjirakkatu house, (Party-in-person)
Kusumagiri P.O., Kakkanad,
Athani, Kochi-682 030,
Ernakulam.
Vs
1. The Manager, : Opposite parties
Sharp business System (India) Ltd., (service of notice of the 1st
214-221, Ansal Tower, Opp. Party has not been
38 Nehru Palace, completed)
New Delhi-110 019.
2. Manager, Sharp Business (O.Ps 2 and 3 absent)
Systems India Ltd., Amal Complex,
P.P. Ummer road, Kochi-35.
3. Manager,
Pattasseril Business associates Ltd.,
Mayur Business Centre,
Pullapady Jn, Chittoor road,
Ernakulam-35.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The undisputed facts of the complaint’s case are as follows:
The complainant purchased a solar genset with two solar panels at
a price of Rs. 61,000/- from the 3rd opposite party. After 4 months from the date of purchase the gen set became malfunctioning. At the instance of the complainant the technicians of the 3rd opposite party repaired the system. Again on 09-08-2013 the genset went out of order and the technicians of the 3rd opposite party found that both the batteries of the genset were not working. Though the 2nd opposite party agreed to replace the genset, later they went back on their promise. Thus the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties to refund the price of the genset together with a compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. This complaint hence.
2. The service of notice of the 1st opposite party has not been completed. In spite of service of notice from this Forum the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties opted to remain absent for reasons not stated or explained. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A9 were marked. Heard the complainant who appeared in person.
3. The points that arose for consideration are,
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the
gen set from the opposite parties 2 and 3.
ii. Whether the opposite parties 2 and 3 are liable to pay
compensation to the complainant?
4. Point No. i. Ext. A1 retail invoice goes to show that on 07-01-2013 the complainant purchased a solar genset at a price of Rs. 61,000/- from the 3rd opposite party which was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. Two years warranty has been provided for the gen set by the manufacturer evident from Ext. A2 warranty card. According to the complainant the gen set became defunct and in spite of repeated requests and reminders the opposite parties failed to take any action to replace the gen set or to refund its price. Exts. A3 to A6 and A9 letters would show that the opposite parties miserably failed to take any action to mitigate the grievances of the complainant. The above conduct of the opposite parties amounts not only to deficiency in service but also to unfair trade practice. The complainant is legally entitled to get replacement of gen set or to get refund of its price.
5. According to the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission a frustrated consumer is entitled to get refund of the price of the gadget. (Soni Ericson Vs. Ashish Agarwal (IV) 2007 CPJ 294). Resultantly in the instant case the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the get set from the opposite parties 2 & 3 especially when the recurring defect of the gen set were caused within the currency of the warranty period.
6. Point No. ii. We think that the above direction is enough to abate the agony of the complainant, so we refrain from awarding compensation.
7. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite parties 2 and 3 shall jointly and severally refund the price of the gen set as per Ext. A1 to the complainant together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization. The complainant is directed to return the defective gen set to the opposite parties simultaneously.
The above order shall be complied with, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 25th day of April 2014.
Sd/-A. Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.
Sd/-Beena Kumari V.K., Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits:
Ext. A1 : Copy of retail invoice
A2 : Copy of warranty card
A3 : Copy of letter dt. 03/01/2014
A4 : Copy of letter dt. 14/02/2014
A5 : Copy of letter dt. 14-02-2014
A6 : Copy of letter dt. 14-02-2014
A7 : Copy of A.D. card
A8 : Copy of A.D. card
A9 : Copy of e-mail dt. 02-02-2014
Opposite party’s Exhibits: Nil
