BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT.S .K. SREELA : MEMBER

O.P.No: 439/2004

Dated: 15..12..2008

Complainant:

N. Vijayakumar, Vadakkethottam Puthen Veedu, Thathiyoor, Manchavilakom – P.O

Opposite parties:

1. Mohanan, Delta Tech, Akshaya Shopping Centre, Neyyattinkara.

2. Bose, Delta Tech, ..do..

3. Unni, Technician, Delta Tech ..do..

4. METASCAN, Electronics & Communication Pvt.Ltd,1-8-4/2 Kamalanagar, ECIL Post, Hyderabad – 62.

This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 04..06..2005, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08..02..2008 and re-heard the complaint. This O.P having been heard on 13..11..2008, the Forum on 15..12..2008 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A., MEMBER:

The complainant is conducting a STD booth. In connection with that work he purchased a computer billing machine of opposite parties on 10..06..2004. The opposite parties issued a warranty card for one year. After two months of purchase the machine became faulty. Then the complainant informed the matter to the opposite parties. One of the Technicians of the opposite parties came and repaired the machine but the complaint states that the machine was not functioning properly. The bill issued by the machine does not tally with the actual bill. Due to that fault the complainant sustained huge loss and hardships. As per the complainant it is very difficult to run the STD booth with this faulty billing machine. Hence he prays for the replacement of the machine or refund the price with compensation.

2. Opposite parties remains ex-parte.

3. Points to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties?

2. Reliefs and Costs?

3. Points (i) & (ii): The complainant adduced statements as PW1 and he has produced 2 documents. The document marked as Ext.P1 is the warranty card. Exts.P2 is the copy of bills from the billing machine. The 4^th opposite party is the manufacturer of Metascan. Opposite parties 1 to 3 are the dealer and authorized service technicians. The opposite parties are ex-parte. The complainant has not produced the bill of the machine for showing the price of the same. At the time of examination, he deposed that the opposite parties did not issue bill to him at the time of purchase, only issued the warranty card. Since the opposite parties have not turned up to contest the case, we are inclined to believe that the complainant's case is true and the warranty card given reveals that there is one year warranty. Hence the defect occurred during the warranty period, the opposite parties are liable to rectify the defects. Hence the complaint is allowed.

In the result the 4^th opposite party – the manufacturer is directed to rectify the defect of the machine or replace the machine with a new one within one month from the date of order. And also shall pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost. Time for compliance is one month. Thereafter the above said amounts shall carry 9% interest till realization.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 15^th day of December, 2008.

BEENA KUMARI.A., MEMBER.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

PRESIDENT.

S .K. SREELA,

MEMBER.

ad.

O.P.No.439/2004

APPENDIX

1. Complainant's witness:

PW1 : N. Vijaya Kumar

2. Complainant's documents:

    

P1 : Photocopy of certificate of warranty

P2 : " of bill dated 08..11..04, 06..11..04, 12..11..04, 06..11..04 & 16..11..04.

III. Opposite parties' witness: NIL

4. Opposite parties documents: NIL

PRESIDENT.