BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
C.C.No. 249/2009 Dated: 15..12..2009 Complainant: Ram Kumar. V.N., 'Aiswarya', Cherukara Road, Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram.
Opposite party:
Manager, Mobily, 26/95, Jayabharatham Bldg., Statue, Thiruvananthapuram.
This O.P having been heard on 14..12..2009, the Forum on 15..12..2009 delivered the following: ORDER
SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A., MEMBER:
Brief facts of the case are as follows: The complainant purchased one head set from the opposite party on 8/8/2009. The head set became defective within one month from the date of purchase. The complainant informed the matter to the opposite party, but the response of the opposite party was negative. The price of the said head set is Rs.350/-, but it is a sub-standard one in quality. The complainant states that the opposite party wilfully supplied the low quality and defective head set to the complainant. Hence the complainant approached this Forum for the redressal of his grievances. 2. The opposite party in this case is 'Mobily'. The opposite party accepted the notice from this Forum. But did not turn up to contest the case. Hence opposite party remains ex-parte.
3. Points that would arise for consideration are:
Whether there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite party? Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs and costs?
4. Points (i) & (ii) : The complainant in this case filed proof affidavit and produced one document for evidence. The affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged. The head set in dispute is marked as MO.1. The bill issued by the opposite party is marked as Ext.P1. In this case the opposite party accepted notice issued from this Forum, but did not turn up to contest the case or challenge the allegations in the complaint. Hence we find that in this case expert opinion is not necessary as per Sec 13(1) (c) of Consumer Protection Act. On the basis of the affidavit and document produced by the complainant this Forum allow the complaint.
5. The complainant has succeeded in establishing the complaint. We find that the act of the opposite party in selling such substandard head set and their attitude in not rectifying the defects amount to deficiency in service for which the complainant has to be compensated.
In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.350/- the price of the head set to the complainant and shall also pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as costs. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter 12% annual interest shall also be paid to the entire amount. The opposite party can take back the head set from the Forum after the compliance of the order.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 15th day of December, 2009. BEENA KUMARI. A, MEMBER.
G.SIVAPRASAD, PRESIDENT.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER. ad.
C.C.No.249/2009 APPENDIX I. Complainant's witness: PW1 : Ram Kumar. V.N II. Complainant's documents:
P1 : Photocopy of bill No. 7355 dated 8/8/2009 issued by opposite party for Rs. 350/-.
III. Opposite party's witness : NIL IV. Opposite party's documents : NIL
V. Court Exhibit:
MO1 : Head set.
PRESIDENT
ad. BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
C.C.No. 249/2009 Dated: 15..12..2009 Complainant: Ram Kumar. V.N., 'Aiswarya', Cherukara Road, Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram.
Opposite party:
Manager, Mobily, 26/95, Jayabharatham Bldg., Statue, Thiruvananthapuram.
This O.P having been heard on 14..12..2009, the Forum on 15..12..2009 delivered the following: ORDER
SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A., MEMBER:
Brief facts of the case are as follows: The complainant purchased one head set from the opposite party on 8/8/2009. The head set became defective within one month from the date of purchase. The complainant informed the matter to the opposite party, but the response of the opposite party was negative. The price of the said head set is Rs.350/-, but it is a sub-standard one in quality. The complainant states that the opposite party wilfully supplied the low quality and defective head set to the complainant. Hence the complainant approached this Forum for the redressal of his grievances. 2. The opposite party in this case is 'Mobily'. The opposite party accepted the notice from this Forum. But did not turn up to contest the case. Hence opposite party remains ex-parte.
3. Points that would arise for consideration are:
Whether there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite party? Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs and costs?
4. Points (i) & (ii) : The complainant in this case filed proof affidavit and produced one document for evidence. The affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged. The head set in dispute is marked as MO.1. The bill issued by the opposite party is marked as Ext.P1. In this case the opposite party accepted notice issued from this Forum, but did not turn up to contest the case or challenge the allegations in the complaint. Hence we find that in this case expert opinion is not necessary as per Sec 13(1) (c) of Consumer Protection Act. On the basis of the affidavit and document produced by the complainant this Forum allow the complaint.
5. The complainant has succeeded in establishing the complaint. We find that the act of the opposite party in selling such substandard head set and their attitude in not rectifying the defects amount to deficiency in service for which the complainant has to be compensated.
In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.350/- the price of the head set to the complainant and shall also pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as costs. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter 12% annual interest shall also be paid to the entire amount. The opposite party can take back the head set from the Forum after the compliance of the order.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 15th day of December, 2009. BEENA KUMARI. A, MEMBER.
G.SIVAPRASAD, PRESIDENT.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER. ad.
C.C.No.249/2009 APPENDIX I. Complainant's witness: PW1 : Ram Kumar. V.N II. Complainant's documents:
P1 : Photocopy of bill No. 7355 dated 8/8/2009 issued by opposite party for Rs. 350/-.
III. Opposite party's witness : NIL IV. Opposite party's documents : NIL
V. Court Exhibit:
MO1 : Head set.
PRESIDENT
......................Smt. Beena Kumari. A
......................Smt. S.K.Sreela
......................Sri G. Sivaprasad | | 
