CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.
Present
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC No.48/11
Saturday the 23rd day of July,2011
Petitioner : Jose Thomas,
Vathyakavil,
Muttar PO,
Alappuzha Dist.
Vs.
Opposite parties : Manoj Mobile Market,
PMJ Complex
Changanachery
Kottayam Dist.
(Adv. K. Madhavan Pillai)
O R D E R
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member.
The case of the complainant presented on 24-2-11 is as follows. He had purchased a memory card worth Rs.440/- from the opposite party on 22-2-2011. At the time of purchase the opposite party has not given the warranty card even after demanded by the complainant. On same day itself the card became defective when it was using for the 1st instance. The very next day the complainant approached the opposite party and requested to rectify the defect or refund of money. But the opposite party did not even care to attend the complainant. There was clear deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.
The notice was served with the opposite party. They appeared and filed their version contending as follows. The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The purchase of memory card dtd 22/2/11 was admitted by the opposite party. The memory card was defective due to negligent use of the complainant. Due to the negligent act of the complainant the memory card was broken. There was no defect in the memory card as alleged in the complaint. The opposite party told the complainant that the alleged defect will be examined and thereafter takes a decision in the matter. Then the complainant used obscene words and he had broken two mobile phones in the shop. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party had sustained a loss of Rs.5000/- due to the act of the complainant. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and one document which is marked as Exts.A1. Complainant is examined as PW1.
Heard both sides. We have gone through the complaint, version, documents and evidences of both sides. The case of the complainant is that the memory card became defective on its 1st use itself. According to him the opposite party has not served the warranty card even after he demanded the same. The opposite party has taken a contention that the memory card became defective due to misuse of the complainant. According to the opposite party the complainant had approached the opposite party with the memory card and he used obscene words towards the opposite party and broken two mobile phones in the shop. Admittedly the memory card purchased from the opposite party was defective. We have no reasons to dis-believe the sworn proof affidavit of the complainant. Moreover from the available evidence it can be seen that the opposite party has not issued the warranty card. However the memory card was not useful. Hence we are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be allowed.
In the result the complaint is allowed as follows. We direct the opposite party to refund the price of the memory card ie Rs.440/-(As per A1) and pay Rs.500/- as compensation for inconveniences and pay Rs.250/- as costs of these proceedings. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/-
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-
Appendix
Documents produced by complainant
Ext.A1-is the copy of receipt dtd 22/2/11
