DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.397 of 2021
Date of institution: 29.06.2021 Date of decision : 12.12.2022
Amarjit Singh, resident of House No.1820, Phase-5, Mohali.
…….Complainant
Versus
Max Sports, SCO 356-357, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh through its owner.
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Ms. Gagandeep Gosal, Member.
Ms. Paramjeet Kaur, Member
Present: Complainant in person.
OP ex-parte.
Order dictated by :- Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred to as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’ for short) on the ground that he purchased one treadmill by paying an amount of Rs.25998.94 from OP. It is specifically alleged in the complaint that the treadmill was duly installed at the residence of the CC, but it started giving problems from the very beginning. Immediately the CC brought the matter to the knowledge of the OP. The CC was promised many times by the OP to remove the defects, but nothing was done. The CC had been requesting the OP to either rectify the defects or to replace the same, but nothing happened.
Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought directions to the OP to refund him the price of treadmill i.e. Rs.25,998.94 and also to pay him consolidated amount of Rs.55,000/- towards harassment, mental and physical agony as well as litigation expenses. The complaint of the CC is duly signed and verified. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.
2. The OP did not appear and was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 22.02.2022.
3. The CC in support of his complaint submitted in evidence documents Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2.
4. We, have heard the complainant and have gone through the file.
5. Since, none has appeared on behalf of the OP to rebut the contentions of the CC and the allegations of the complaint, in such a peculiar situation, we have no option except to believe the averments of the complaint, which are duly supported by an affidavit of the CC and documents. It is writ large on the file that the CC purchased the treadmill from the OP, which did not function even once as alleged in the complaint. It is also proved on the file that the CC had been requesting the OP either to replace or to refund the price of the treadmill, but every time his request fell on deaf ears. In support of his complaint, the CC has annexed Ex.C-1, which clearly proves the purchase of treadmill on payment of Rs.25,998.94. The CC has further annexed Ex.C-2 vide which he has requested the OP to replace the treadmill with the new one or to refund him the price. It is also proved on file the CC is resident of Mohali, which falls with the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission.
6. Accordingly, the present complaint is allowed and the OP is directed to refund to the CC the price of the treadmill to the tune of Rs.25,998.94 alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of purchase till realisation. The OP is further burdened to pay a consolidated amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.3,000/- to the CC towards mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation. Compliance of this order be made by the OP within 30 days from the date of receipt of free certified copy of the order. Certified copies of the orders be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record.
Announced
December 12, 2022
(Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)
President
I agree.
(Ms. Gagandeep Gosal)
Member
I agree.
(Ms. Paramjeet Kaur)
Member
