IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 31stday of January, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C CNo. 101/2019 (filed on 26-06-2019)
Petitioner : Venugopal K.
Odukkathil House,
Kidangoor P.O.
Kottayam – 686 572.
Vs.
Opposite Party : Proprietor,
Minarva Agencies,
Peroor Junction,
Ettumanoor P.O.
Kottayam.
(Adv. Avaneesh V.N.)
O R D E R
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Case of the complainant is as follows:
On 23-4-2019, the complainant entrusted his PREETHI (popular) model mixie to the opposite party for repair works. The service personal of the opposite party service centre had issued a receipt for the same in the name Vijay sankar who is the son of the complainant. It is alleged in the complaint that without examining the mixiethe technician of the opposite party said that the motor of the mixiewas damaged and is to be replaced. Then the complaint asked them to not to replace the motor without informing him and leave the service center that he would come back at evening. At about 7 pm on the same day when the complainant reached the opposite party it is informed that the motor of the mixi got damaged and required to be replaced. Then the complainant got back the mixi after returning the receipt and entrusted to the Sha enterprises for repair. After inspecting the mixie, it was informed to him by the said service center that the mixie is not having the original motor of the Preethi Companyand having a damaged local motor and returned mixie without repair. It is further alleged in the complaint that earlier one or two times the mixie was entrusted to the opposite party for minor repair works. On the next day when the complainant asked about the replacement of the motor, the officials of the opposite party denied the same. According to the complainant, he had suffered much hardship due to the deficiency in service from the opposite party. Hence, this complaint is filed praying for an order to direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 5000 which is the cost incurred by the complainant for purchasing a new mixie and compensation and cost of this complaint.
Upon notice opposite party appeared before the commission and filed version as follows:
The complaint is not maintainable. The complainant did not entrust the mixie with opposite party on 23-4-2019. Another person entrusted the mixie with opposite party for the repair works and obtained the receipt for the same. On examination, it was found that the motor of the mixie was damaged and is to be replaced. It is further informed to him that the approximate cost for the same would be Rs. 1250 and returned the mixie without carrying out any repair works and levying any service charges. . When the complainant approached the opposite party, it was also informed to him. The technician of the opposite party had only examined the motor by opening the same and did not replace the same as alleged in the complaint. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.
Evidence of this case consists of deposition of the Pw1 and Exhibit A1. Opposite party filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination. No documentary evidence is produced from the side of the opposite party.
On evaluation of complaint version and evidence on record, we would like to consider the following point.
Whether the complainant had succeeded to prove deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party and he is entitled for any reliefs.
Point
The specific case of the complainant is that on 23-4-2019 he entrusted one PREETHI (popular) model mixie to the opposite party for repair works. According to him the service personal of the opposite party service centre had issued a receipt for the same in the name of his son Vijay sankar. During cross-examination, Pw1 who is the complainant deposed that without examining the mixie it was informed that the motor of the mixie was damaged. He further deposed that the opposite party had not received any consideration from him. Pw1 would depose that the mixie was two year old and guarantee for the same was over. According to him, the opposite party had rectified earlier complaint of the mixie.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent Judgment dt. 6th October 2021 i.e. in “SGS India Limited v/s Dolphin International Limited”, categorically held that the onus of proof that there was deficiency in service is on the complainant.
Though the complainant alleged that the original motor of the mixie had replaced by the opposite partywith a damaged localmotor, he did not produce any evidence to prove his case. Exhibit A1 which is the print out of photographs of the motor is not sufficient to substantiate the contention of the complainant. The complainant did not produce any expert evidence to show that the original motor of the mixie is replaced with another one. Though he has a specific case that he came to know about the replacement of the motor from the service personals of Sha enterprises, but there is no evidence before us to prove that the mixie was entrusted with the Sha enterprises for repair works on 23-4-2019 or any other dates.
In view of the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above-referred Judgment and on the basis of the above discussions, we find that the complainant has, on facts, been found to not establish any willful fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the service rendered by the Opposite Parties. As the burden of proving the deficiency in service is upon the person who alleges it, we find that the complainant has miserably failed to establish the case put forward by him against the Opposite Parties. Thus, the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 31st day of January, 2022.
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Witness from the side of complainant
Pw1 – Venugopal
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 -Copy of photo of Preethi popular mixie affixing the sticker of Minarva Agencies
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
Nil
By Order
Senior Superintendent
