BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE

Dated this the 12^th January 2017

PRESENT

        SMT. C.V. SHOBHA             :  HON’BLE PRESIDENT

        SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI        :  HON’BLE MEMBER                                        

COMPLAINT NO.308/2016

        (Admitted on 17.09.2016)

E.Subramanya Bhat,

Aged 45 years,

Shree. Associates,

Puttur Centre Building,

Puttur Taluk, D.K.                                                                         

                                                    …… Complainant

(Advocate for Complainant by Sri. SD)         

VERSUS

Managing Director,

VMC Systems ltd,

Plot No.23, Survey No.1/1,

Kancha Imarath Hardware Technology Park,

Raviryala R.R District, Hydarabad,

Telangana State.

                                                           ….…. Opposite Party

       (Opposite Party No.1: Exparte)

ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE MEMBER

SMT. LAVANYA M. RAI

1. 1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service as against the opposite party claiming certain reliefs.
2. The brief facts of the case are as under:

          The complainant has purchased modems type I and type II from the Opposite Party as per tax invoice No.25 dated. 25.06.2015. The complainant has purchased 30 units of type I modem and 20 units of type II modems under the above invoice for Rs. 43,575/  Further the complainant also purchased adopters from Opposite Party.  It is submitted that complainant is an authorized agent for BSNL products and the agency is run for the complainant self-employment and to takeout his livelihood.

          The matter stood thus out of the above type II modems 11 modems were found to be defective and in type I modem 7 modems were found to be defective after the modems were installed.  Further 4 adopters were also found to be defect.  There after the complainant has immediately informed the Opposite Party over the phone and as per their advice the modems and adopters were sent to the Opposite Party as per letters dated 30.07.2015, 21.08.2015, 02.09.2015, 22.09.2015, 06.10.2015, 12.10.2015, 23.10.2015 and 05.11.2015 through speed post for replacing the same.  It is submitted that since the Opposite Party did not respond to the above letters, the complainant has sent Gmail to the Opposite Party as per Gmail dated 01.09.2015 and 01.10.2015 to replace defective modems. The Opposite Party has admitted to replace the defective modems through Gmail dated. 01.09.2015 and 01.10.2015.  Further, the defective modems were/ are under warranty period and as per rules it must be replaced or repaired free of cost.  But unfortunately the Opposite Party did not respond to the complainant repeated requests.  Hence the complainant got issued lawyers notice and same was served to the Opposite Party but no reply.  Hence the above complaint filed under section 12 of the C.P.Act 1986(here in after referred to as the Act) seeking direction from this Fora to pay Rs. 50,000/ with 12% interest from 08.01.2015 till payment and also pay compensation and cost of the proceedings from the Opposite Party.

3. Version Notice served to the opposite party by RPAD, inspite of receiving version notice not appeared nor contested the case before this forum.  Hence we have proceeded Ex parte as against Opposite Party version of Opposite Party not filed hence treated nil.
4. In support of the complainant One Mr. E.Subramanya Bhat, (CW1) the complainant filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and produced the documents same has got marked as Ex C1 to C15.  Since the Opposite Party placed Ex parte not lead any evidence hence treated nil.

In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:

1. Whether the complainant proves that  there is a deficiency  of service on the part of the Opposite
2. If so, for what relief and from whom the complainant entitled?
3. What order? 

We have considered the notes/oral arguments submitted by the learned counsel and also considered the materials that was placed before this Forum and answer the points are as follows:.

Point No. (i) to (ii): As per Affirmative

Point No. (iii): As per the final order.

REASONS

5. POINTS No. (i) to (iii):  The complainant in order to substantiate the averments made in the complaint filed affidavit supported by the documents i.e. Ex C1 to C15.  The Ex C1 is the tax invoice.  Ex C2 to C9 copy of the letters sent to the Opposite Party.  Ex C10 copy of the gmail, Ex.C11 and C12 reply of the Opposite Party, Ex.C13 lawyers notice, Ex.C14 postal acknowledgment, Ex C15 Notarized copy of the certificate issued by B.S.N.L and notice issued by RPAD returned as left. Further inspite of receiving notice by RPAD against Opposite Party neither appeared nor contested the case till this date.  The entire evidence placed by the complainant not contradicted nor controverted by the Opposite Party which requires no further proof. In view of the above said reason we hold that the Opposite Party shall pay Rs.43,575/ along with 12% interest from 08.01.2015 till payment and also pay Rs.5,000/ as cost of the litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. In the present case interest considered by this Forum itself is compensation therefore no separate amount of compensation is awarded.

 In the result, accordingly we pass the following Order:

ORDER

The complaint allowed. The Opposite Party shall pay sum of  Rs. 43,575/ (Rupees forty three thousand five hundred seventy five only) along with 12% interest from 08.01.2015 till payment and also pay sum of Rs. 5,000/ (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. In case of failure to pay the above mentioned amount with in the stipulated time, the opposite party is directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the above said total amount from the date of failure till the date of payment.

Copy of this order as per statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties and therefore the file shall be consigned to record room.

(1 to 5 pages dictated to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 12^th of January 2017)                               

            MEMBER                                             PRESIDENT        

(SMT. LAVANYA M.RAI)                      (SMT. C.V.SHOBHA)

D.K. District Consumer Forum                D.K. District Consumer Forum

            Mangalore.                                                Mangalore.

ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:

CW1: Mr. E.Subramanya Bhat

Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.C1: 25.06.2015: Copy of the Tax invoice.

Ex.C2: 30.07.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along  with postal receipt.

Ex.C3: 21.08.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C4: 02.09.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C5: 22.09.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C6: 06.10.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C7: 12.10.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C8: 23.10.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C9: 05.11.2015: O/c of the letters sent to the Opposite Party along with postal receipt.

Ex.C10: 01.09.2015: Copy of the Gmail.

Ex.C11: 01.09.2015: Reply of the Opposite Party.

Ex.C12: 01.10.2015: Reply of the Opposite Party.

Ex.C13: 19.11.2015: O/c of the regd lawyer’s notice.

Ex.C14: 01.12.2015: Postal Acknowledgement.

Ex.C15: 18.06.2007: Notarized copy of the certificate issued by BSNL.                        

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:

Nil

Documents marked on behalf of the Opposite Party:      

Nil

Dated: 12.01.2017.                                               MEMBER