By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,
1. Complainant is aggrieved that the electric organ with adaptor purchased for Rs.2,250/- from opposite party became defective the second day itself. That while buying the product opposite party had assured to provide back up service and also to replace in case of any defect. Though complainant informed opposite party about the defect of the product opposite party did not attend to his grievance. Complainant then lodged a complaint before police station but was advised to approach the Consumer Forum. That his repeated requests for replacement or refund of the purchase price was not heeded to by opposite party. Hence this complaint praying to remove the defects pointed out by complainant, or to replace or refund the purchase price. 2. Opposite party filed a very detailed version in which the sale of electric organ with adaptor to complainant for Rs.2,250/- is admitted. Opposite party denies that complainant approached the second day with defect to the product It is submitted that complainant has never reported any defect. That later opposite party was called to the police station on a complaint lodged by complainant herein regarding the defect of the product. That on submission of facts by opposite party, the Sub Inspector was convinced. That the product is made in China and does not have any replacement guarantee or free service. That the product is just a toy and intended to be used for basic lessons in music for beginners. That it does not have facilities for professional use. That opposite party has not sold any product that is defective. If there is any defect it may be due to careless and rough use by complainant. That opposite party is not liable to replace the product. That complaint is to be dismissed. 3. Both sides have filed affidavits reiterating their respective pleadings. Exts.A1 to A3 marked for complainant. No document marked for opposite party. MO1 series is the electric organ with adaptor. Either side has not adduced any oral evidence. 4. Opposite party has vehemently denied defect tot he product. It is also contended that the product is made in China and does not have any replacement or service guarantee. The electric organ which is MO1 was brought before the Forum by the complainant. Complainant demonstrated MO1 before us. We found that some of the keys were getting stuck while playing the music. We are able to conclude that MO1 has defects and is not in a usable condition. When a product is sold it should have the quality for the due consideration paid. The contention of opposite party that the product is made in China and has no service or replacement guarantee is untenable and unacceptable. Traders cannot be allowed to exploit the ignorance of consumers. By sale of MO1 product even though made in China, opposite party has definitely made some profit. If that be so the consumer cannot be left with a substandard product without even an option of service or repair. The situation not only empties the pocket of the consumer but leaves him hapless and helpless. No commodity shall be marketed in a manner to benefit only the trader and leave the consumer exploited. The old idea of 'caveat emptor' has yielded to the present rule of 'caveat vendette' and the purchaser has a right to get a defect free product. We hold that the act of opposite party selling a susbtandard product amounts to unfair trade practice. The price of the product is admitted to be Rs.2,250/-. Ext.A1 is the small paper piece issued by opposite party to complainant in the place of a proper sales bill. Issuing such paper slips instead of sales bill is definitely viewed by us seriously. In the circumstances and facts of the case we consider that refund of the purchase price to the complainant would meet the ends of justice.
5. In the result, we allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay Rs.2,250/- (Rupees Two thousand two hundred and fifty only) to complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On payment the electric organ with adaptor which is produced before the Forum and marked as MO1 shall be returned to opposite party on his making an application for the same.
Dated this 21st day of January, 2009.
Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT
Sd/- MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/- MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A3 Ext.A1 : A small paper piece issued by opposite party to complainant instead of a proper sales bill. Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the request dated, 17-5-2008 by complainant to Sub-Inspector of Police, Manjeri. Ext.A3 : Certificate dated, 27-5-2008 given by Sub-Inspector of Police, Manjeri to complainant. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Material Object marked : MO1 MO1 : Electric organ with adaptor.
Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT
Sd/- MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/- MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER
......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI | | 
