In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   390 / 2010.

1)                   Sri Aloke Ghosh,

13B, Naresh Mitra Sarani, Kolkata-700026.                                              ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   M/s. Khaitan Electricals Ltd.,

46C, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700071.

2)                   M/s. Saibal Ganguly,

142E, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700026.                                         ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Smt. Jhumki Saha, Member.

Order No.    1 5    Dated  3 0 / 0 3 / 2 0 1 2 .

          Complainant Mr. Aloke Ghosh by filing a petition u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has prayed for a direction to be given upon o.p. to replace two fans bought from o.p. or to refund Rs.2540/- being the cost price of two fans, to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation, Rs.1000/- as litigation cost and such other order or orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.

          Complainant purchased two fans from o.p. no.2 manufactured by o.p. no.1 for an amount of Rs.2540/- vide cash memo dt.28.5.10. But after few days those two went out of order. Complainant informed of the same to the service centre. Service centre tried but went in vain. Thereafter complainant complained about it, to both o.ps. but they did not care at all to repair the same as a result of which both fans became idle and complainant did not get any service from these fans. Lastly complainant sent lawyer’s notice to o.ps. demanding the replacement or refund of Rs.2540/-. Although o.ps. received lawyer’s notice but did not reply or redress the complainant’s grievance. Finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant case. Notices were served upon o.ps. O.p. no.1 appeared and filed w/v but o.p. no.2 never appeared and the case was heard ex parte.

Decision with reasons: -

          We have gone through petition of complaint, evidence and BNA filed by complainant. We have also gone through w/v of o.p. no.1. It is stated by o.p. no.1 in para no.8 of their w/v that their person visited complainant’s house and made the fans in perfect condition but complainant demanded that fans should have given more air. But her it is to be mentioned that o.p. no.1 has not annexed any document in support of their this contention. There should have been some kind of job sheet when service person visited complainant’s house. May be that would have been an unsigned document as per o.p. no.1’s allegation. There has to be a level of expectation on every purchase. O.ps. failed to satisfy that level of expectation, too. Moreover, after few days of purchase, both fans became out of order which is not at all expected from such reputed companies. Thereby o.ps. are found to be negligent and also deficient in service. Accordingly, the case succeeds on merit with costs against o.ps.

          Hence, ordered,

          That o.ps. are jointly and severally directed to replace the fans of same quality having same feathers within 30 days, if not available, they are directed to refund Rs.2540/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred forty) only to complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order. The o.ps. are further directed to pay Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) only as litigation cost within 30 days, i.d. entire amount will carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till full realization.

          Supply certified copy of this order to the parties. 

   ____Sd-____                                                    _______Sd-_______

     MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT