2.                  Brief fact of the case is that complainant purchased on computer LED Monitor from O.P.s on payment of   ₹ 25,656 on 07-02-2013  vide annexure Tax Invoice receipt. O.P.s also agreed to supply some articles  like MTS DUNGLE and PRINTER free of cost within two days of such purchase. But it is alleged by the complainant that he made repeated requests for that but O.P.s remained silent and never supplied those items. Moreover,  just after two months, Monitor went out of order which was informed to O.P.s and on their instruction, complainant deposited the Monitor on 09-09-2013 as the warrantee period was for 3 years. Complainant even requested them to replace the same with a new one. But since 09-09-2013 O.P.s neither repaired the same nor delivered it to the complainant. So, the Computer/Monitor is still lying with O.P.s. since 09-09-2013 and complainant is suffering financial loss as he could not get any material service from that monitor. Being aggrieved and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief

3.                  Notices were served upon O.P.s. But they neither appeared nor filed any W/V. Accordingly the case was heard exparte.

4.      Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.                  We have carefully gone through the Complainant/petition and its annexure and noted their contents. Within two months of purchase of the Monitor after paying such a big amount of   ₹ 25,656, complainant could not get any fruitful result. O.P.s have not given any post sale service. And we are  of candid opinion that Monitor was definitely suffering from manufacturing  defect. And also the O.P.s have received the entire purchase price from the complainant, it is solely their duty and responsibility to redress the problem of the complainant, at least during  the warrantee period. Moreover, even after receiving the summons of this Forum, they did not care to appear before this Forum. No W/V was filed by them, where from it is crystal clear that they have nothing to put for ward in their favour. So, we have no difficultly to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant.

6.                    Accordingly, we find that the O.P.s are grossly negligent in discharging their  duties for which the prayer of the complainant should be allowed.     

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  153 of 2014 ( HDF 153 of 2014 )  be  allowed ex parte  with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

The O.P.s are further directed to pay ₹ 5,000 as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation costs totaling the entire decreetal amount of ₹ 31,656 within one month from this order, i.d the entire amount shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a till actual payment.

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.