Date of filing:- 29/10/2020.
Date of Order/Judgement:-27/02/2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Complaint No. 91 of 2020.
Bikash Chandra Mahapatra, aged about 46(forty six) years, son of Tribikram Mahapatra, Occupation- Legal Practitioner, Resident of Brahmachari, Ward No.16, Bargarh, Po/Tah:- Bargarh, Ps. Bargarh (Town), Dist. Bargarh.
Complainant.
V e r s u s
- Videocon Industries Limited, represented through its Managing Diretor, 14 KMS Store, Aurangabad- Paithan Road, Chitegaon, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad- 341105 (Maharastra).
- Sanjay Sales, represented through its Proprietor, Authorised Dealer of Videocon, Goushala Complex, near Gandhi Chowk, Bargarh, Po/Th. Bargarh, Ps. Bargarh (Town) Dist. Bargarh-768028.
Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- :- Sri Tuna Chandra Tripathy and Associates.
For the Opposite Party No.1 and 2;- :- Exparte.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Smt. Jigeesha Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Smt. Anju Agarwal ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.27/02/2023. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Smt. Anju Agrawal, Member (w):-
- The case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased one Videocon LED TV Model VJU 32 HH 23 CAH, bearing Sl No.110817110163505451 on 31st day of October 2017 vide Retail Invoice No 4815 from the opposite party no 2 against due receipt and the said TV was installed in the house of the complainant. That the 0pposite Party No 1 is dealing with business of electronics item such as Television ,LED TV, Washing Machine ,Refrigerator etc. throughout India including the District of Bargarh.The opposite party no 2 is the dealer of the said T.V. That the ops have given assured original warranty for one year and further extended warranty for 2 year. That after two and half years of its installation i.e within the extended warranty period some defect occurred in the said TV for which the complainant lodge his grievance before opposite party no 2 and the opposite party no 2 assured to repair the same. But the opposite party no 2 did not repair the said TV within the warranty period after due communication with the opposite party no 2 .Hence amounting to deficiency of service ,being harassed this complaint petition was filed before this commission .
- Notices has been sent to the opposite parties but they did not appear and hence the opposite party no 1 and 2 are set exparte on dt 30/09/22 and 19/12/22 respectively.
- Perused the documents filed by the parties and following issues are framed:-
ISSUES:- - Whether the Complainant is a Consumer of the Opposite parties ?
- Whether the Opposite parties are deficient in service ?
- What relief the Complainant is entitled to get ?
Issue No.1 The Complaint purchased one Videocon LED TV Model VJU 32 HH 23 CAH, bearing Sl No.110817110163505451 on 31st day of October 2017 vide Retail Invoice No 4815 from the Opposite party No.2 and Opposite Party No.1 is the manufacturer and of the aforesaid TV. Hence, the Complainant is the Consumer of the Opposite Parties. Issue No.2 The Complainant purchased one Videocon LED TV Model VJU 32 HH 23 CAH, bearing Sl No.110817110163505451 on 31st day of October 2017 vide Retail Invoice No 4815. The Opposite Parties gave extended warranty for another two years. Meanwhile problems arise on the TV Set under the extended warranty period. Therefore the Complainant gave a Complaint to the Opposite Party No.2 on Dt. 19/10/2020 but the Opposite Parties neither took any step to repair the TV Set and told the complainant to repair the t.v at his own cost by contacting a person namely Manas. After contacting the said person he expressed his inability to repair the same. After several request the Opposite Parties did not come forward to rectify the defect of the TV of the Complainant or replace the same with new one. The opposite parties after receiving due notices did not turn up to appear before this commission .It is the duty and responsibility of the opposite parties to repair the defect when the product is within the warranty period . Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties towards the Complainant in not rectifying the problems of the TV or replacing the same with new one or refund the cost of the TV set. Issue No.3 As discussed SUPRA the Complainant is entitled for the relief claimed. The Opposite party are jointly and severally liable for deficiency in service by not providing service to the Complainant to repair the aforesaid TV within the warranty period. Accordingly it is ordered. O R D E R The Complaint is allowed on exparte against Opposite Parties. The Opposite Party No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable and directed to replace the TV or refund the cost of the TV set i.e. Rs.19,000 /-(Rupees Nineteen thousand) with interest 9% per annum from the date of Complaint that is 29/10/2020 till realization to the Complainant within 30 days from date of this order. Further, the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only compensation for harassment and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand) only towards litigation expenses. Failing which, the entire amount will carry 12% interest per annum till realization. | |
|
Order pronounced in open court on 27th day of February 2023.
Supply free copies to the parties.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
I agree/-
( Smt. Jigeesha Mishra) (Anju Agarwal)
Dt.27/02/2023 Dt.27/02/2023.
P r e s i d e n t M e m b e r (w)
UPLOADED BY
(SRI DUSMANTA PADHAN)
OFFICE ASSISTANT.
