IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 1st day of July, 2010
Filed on 29.10.09
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.352/09
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri.Shinoj.P.C, 1. The Manager, Angel Agency,
Panthrandilchira, Ramachandra Complex,
Kavalam. Vazhicherry palam, Alappuzha.
2. Fridge Mait,
Thekke Angady,
Kambikkal Junction, Cherthala.
3. Videocon Industries Ltd,
Kadavanthra, Kochi.
(By Adv.George Cheriyan Karipparambil)
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainant case is that the complainant on 8th September 2006 purchased a Videocon Refrigerator from the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs.8500/-(Rupees eight thousand five hundred only). Hardly a month after its purchase, the refrigerator lost its cooling effect, and the same turned unusable. The 1st opposite party was promptly intimated. The 2nd opposite party came to the complainant's residence and the refrigerator was repaired. Even after the said maintenance, the equipment repeated the same imperfection. The services of the 2nd opposite party went in vain. On 11th July 2009, the 2nd opposite party called on the residence of the complainant, and the refrigerator was once again patched up. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.3500/-(Rupees three thousand five hundred only) as service charge. At the time of the refrigerator being purchased, the complainant was assured two years service free of cost. Yet, service charge was availed from the complainant. The opposite parties gave defective instrument to the complainant. The complainant and his family sustained diverse practical difficulties. The opposite parties inflicted untold misery and mental agony to the complainant. Got aggrieved on this, the complainant, approached this Forum for compensation and other relief.
1. On notice being sent, the opposite parties turned up and filed separate version. The contention of the 1st opposite party is that the alleged deficiency of the refrigerator was the outcome of the imperfect handling of the gadget by the complainant. According to the 1st opposite party the complainant used to switch off the refrigerator for the purpose of saving excess electricity. The intermittent cut off of the power rendered the device damaged. The 3rd opposite party also raised almost similar contentions, but offered to refurbish the refrigerator free of cost. The defect if any developed to the device is solely due to the mishandling of the same by the complainant. The complaint is only to be dismissed, the 3rd opposite party asserts.
2. On the side of the complainant, the complainant himself was examined as PW1, and the documents Exbts Al to A5 were marked. Exbt Al is the retail invoice, A2 is the service bill. A3 is free service card. A4 is the Copy of the notice and A5 is the acknowledgement cards. The opposite parties adduced no evidence.
3. Bearing in mind the contentions of the parties, the questions arise for consideration are:-
(a) Whether the refrigerator developed recurrent impairment?
(b) Whether there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
4. Concededly, the complainant purchased the refrigerator for an amount of Rs.8500/-(Rupees eight thousand five hundred only) from the 1st opposite party. The recurrent development or detect to the refrigerator also appears to have been not disputed or defiled by the opposite parties. According to the opposite parties, the recurrence of malfunctioning or nonfunctioning of the refrigerator was the direct consequence of the mishandling of the device by the complainant. Clearly to put, the complainant used to switch off the refrigerator frequently with a view to save the electric energy. Thus keeping the refrigerator inoperative regularly rendered the same imperfect, the opposite parties contend. We perused the available materials put on record by the parties. It seems that the opposite parties, notwithstanding raised some contentions, do not make it a point to lead evidence lending support to its contentions though sufficient opportunity for the same was offered. On the other hand, the complainant produced sufficient materials to establish his case to the core. In the said circumstance, we are constrained to draw adverse inference against the opposite party. We conclude that we have no other course open, but to accept the version advanced by the complainant.
5. For the forgoing facts and findings herein above, the 1st opposite party is directed to replace the refrigerator with the same brand new and to pay an amount of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation to the complainant which will serve the purpose. The complainant is entitled to a cost of Rs.1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) from the opposite parties. The Opposite party shall comply with the said order within 30 days of receipt of this order.
In the result, the complaint is allowed accordingly. The parties are left to hear their own cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 1st day of July, 2010
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Proof affidavit in lieu of position
Ext. A1 - The Retail Invoice
Ext. A2 - The Service Bill
Ext. A3 - The free Service Card
Ext. A4 - The Copy of the Notice
Ext. A5 - The Acknowledgement Cards
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
