Date of Filing : 20.03.2006
Date of Order : 20.10.2017
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER I
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.177/2006
FRIDAY THIS 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017
Mrs. Meenakshi Sai,
21, Sai Illam, K.K.Nagar,
Kolathur,
Chennai – 99. .. Complainant
..Vs..
Mr. M.Sekaran,
Sole Proprietor,
Monica United Engineering,
No.99, L.D.G.Road, Flat No.6,
SPA Mount, Little Mount,
Saidapet, Chennai -15. .. Opposite party.
Counsel for Complainant : M/s. R.Natarajan & others.
Counsel for opposite party : Mr. N.M.Karthikeyan & another
ORDER
THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost of the complaint.
1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:
The complainant submit that on 12.2.2005 he purchased 900 VA power Inverter MONAXY DIGI together with 98 AH BG Battery Exide – SF Black Gold from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.16,800/- and there is warranty for one year to the inventor; battery and other accessories. After duly installation on 18.2.2005 due to the persistent problem with the battery supplied by the opposite party along with the Inventor, the same was not working right from the date of installation. Immediately the complainant informed to the opposite party through phone and after their service person visited the residence of the complainant on 28.4.2005; 20.7.2005; 30.7.2005 and 15.10.2005 respectively and reported that battery is low. As such the act of the opposite party clearly amounts to gross deficiency in service and thereby caused harassment, mental agony and hardship to the complainant. Hence the complaint is filed.
2. The brief averments in Written Version of the opposite parties are as follows:
The opposite party denies each and every allegation except those that are specifically admitted herein. The opposite party submit that they are the manufacturers of the Monaxy Digi power inverter and they have not manufactured the battery. The battery was manufactured by Exide Batteries Ltd and the battery has got exclusive warranty from the manufacturers i.e. M/s. Exide Batteries Ltd, and the warranty card issued by Exide batteries Ltd. was also handed over to the complainant at the time of installation of the inverter. The opposite party also state that if really the complainant faced persistent problem with the battery it has to be informed only to the manufacturer and the retailers of the battery. The opposite party also state that only the family members of the complainant might have disconnected the power supply and hence the battery was not charged to it’s maximum level. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 marked. Proof affidavit of opposite party filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite party.
4. The points for the consideration is:
Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost as prayed for?
5. ON POINT:
Both the complainant and the opposite party after filing their respective written arguments has not turned up to advance any oral arguments. The complainant pleaded in the complaint and contended in the written arguments that on 12.2.2005 he purchased 900 VA power Inverter MONAXY DIGI together with 98 AH BG Battery Exide – SF Black Gold from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.16,800/- as per Ex.A1. As per Ex.A4 there is a warranty for one year to the inventor; battery and other accessories. After due installation on 18.2.2005 due to the persistent problem with the battery supplied by the opposite party along with the Inventor, the same was not working right from the date of installation. Immediately the complainant informed to the opposite party through phone and after their service person visited the residence of the complainant on 28.4.2005; 20.7.2005; 30.7.2005 and 15.10.2005 respectively reported that battery is low which caused great mental agony to the complainant. Hence the complainant was constrained to file this case.
6. The learned counsel for the opposite party contended that admittedly the complainant purchased the inventor set for a sum of Rs.16,800/- and was duly installed on 18.2.2005. Thereafter the complainant informed that the inventor was not properly functioning and the service man of the opposite party attended and found that battery having some defects and the battery supplied along with the inventor was manufactured by Exide Batteries Limited. The warranty also applicable to the Exide battery. The complainant without approaching the Exide Batteries Limited, requested the opposite party to attend the fault. The opposite party attended the fault and found out there is defect in the battery. Further the contention of the opposite party is that since the battery belongs to the Exide battery company i.e. Exide Batteries Limited, the complainant ought to have claimed service etc from the Exide Batteries Limited Company, is not acceptable because admittedly the entire unit supplied by the opposite party. Hence it is the duty of the opposite party to replace a fresh battery of same power. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the opposite party is directed to replace fresh Battery of same power and shall pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony with cost of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant and the point is answered accordingly.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The opposite party is directed to replace fresh Battery of same power and shall pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards mental agony with cost of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) to the complainant.
The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.
Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 20th day of October 2017.
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents:
Ex.A1- 12.2.2005 - Copy of order form issued by the opp. party.
Ex.A2- 17.2.2005 - Copy of bill issued by the opp. party.
Ex.A3- 17.2.2005 - Copy of Delivery challans.
Ex.A4- - - Copy of warranty.
Ex.A5- 18.2.2005 - Copy of inverter service report.
Ex.A6- 28.4.2005 - Copy of inverter service report
Ex.A7- 20.7.2005 - Copy of inverter service report
Ex.A8- 30.7.2005 - Copy of inverter service report
Ex.A9- 15.10.2005 - Copy of inverter service report
Ex.A10- 12.1.2006 - Copy of inverter service report.
Opposite party’s side document: - ..Nil..
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
