BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                               BENGALURU – 560 027.                              

DATED THIS THE 18^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.60/2021

PRESENT:                                                          

Sri.C.V.Maragoor, B.com, LL.M.               ….      PRESIDENT

Smt.L.Mamatha, B.A., (Law), LL.B.….    MEMBER

Sri. M.B. Seena, B.A., (Law), LL.B.            ….         MEMBER

Mr.Ponnaluri Bala Murali Krishna,

S/o P.Rama Krishnaiah,

Aged about 62 years,

R/a No.8 (New No.1052),

Sri.Sai Nilayam, 8^th Main,

Chowdeswari Layout,

Marathahalli,

(By Sri.H.R.Sreepada, Advocate)

V/s

OPPOSITE PARTY:

M/s Mahira Sports,

A Proprietor Firm,

Having its registered office at

No.20, 20^th Main Road, 5^th Phase,

Ramaswamy Layout,

Bengaluru, Karnataka 560078,

Represented by its Proprietor/

Authorized Signatory, Mr.Javed.

 Ex-parte.

******

//ORDER//

SRI.C.V.MARGOOR, PRESIDENT

This complaint is filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to direct the Opposite Party M/s Mahira Sports represented by its proprietor Mr.Javed to rectify the defect in the basketball equipment by replacing it with a new Genuine equipment of standard quality or to refund the amount of Rs.32,900/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and also damages of Rs.60,000/- for financial loss and mental agony suffered by the complainant. 

2.  It is the case of complainant that on 14.06.2020 the complainant had purchased standing basketball equipment along with backboard, hoop and other accessories for his son for Rs.30,000/-.  The complainant has paid price of the basketball equipment in two instalments first instalment of Rs.15,000/- on 14.06.2020 and another Rs.15,000/- on 20.06.2020 through Google pay.  The opposite party had installed the equipment inside the complainant’s residence by charging Rs.1,500/- on 20.06.2020.  The complainant came to know that back-board of the equipment sold by the complainant is defective in the sense that it fails to provide a satisfactory rebound.  In response telephonic calls and WhatsApp messages, the opposite party tried to repair the defective back-board but he could not repair it.  The opposite party has failed to replace a new equipment in place of defective back-board inspite of repeated requests made by the complainant and issue of legal notice dt.10.11.2020.  Hence this complaint. 

        3. In response to notice, the opposite party has failed to put in appearance and on contrary proceeded ex-parte.

4. The complainant filed his affidavit evidence and got marked as EX.P1 to P6 documents.  

       5. We have heard the oral arguments advanced by the learned counsel for complainant and the points that would arise for determination are as under:

 i) Whether the complainant proves that the opposite party has sold defective equipment ?

ii)  Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?

   6.      Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

1. Point No.1:-  In the affirmative 
2. Point No.2:-  In the partly affirmative for the below

REASONS

          7. POINT NO.1 & 2:- Learned counsel for complainant has submitted that the Opposite party has sold defective back-board equipment as such it is unusable basketball for play.  The learned counsel further submits that the complainant falls under the definition of ‘consumer’ since the opposite party has sold defective goods.  The complainant in the affidavit evidence has reiterated the averments of complaint.

8. The complainant has produced EX.P2 payment details of Rs.30,000/- on two instalments and Ex.P.3 & P4 photos indicate the defective back-board.  EX.P5 is chats message exchanged between the complainant and Opposite Party and on 06.07.2020 sent reply that he will replace the back-frame but he wants two weeks’ time as his team is in another project.  The opposite party has went on giving reply that he will replace it in the next week or next day and his last reply dt.09.10.2020 that he would sent the team Wednesday.  The opposite party has failed to replace the basketball equipment then the complainant got issued legal notice through his Advocate on 10.11.2020 and notice is served on the opposite party vide EX.P6(b) postal acknowledgement. The documents produced by the complainant proves that he had purchased basketball equipment along with accessories from the opposite party by paying Rs.30,000/- on 14.06.2020.  The reply given by opposite party proves that the equipment sold by him is defective.  The opposite party in spite of his admission has failed to replace the defective equipment as per his promise for more than 6 months.   It shows that the opposite party has failed to render his service by not replacing it with a new genuine basketball equipment.  When the opposite party has failed to replace the genuine equipment in spite of his undertaking it is not necessary to direct him to replace the defective goods and on the contrary he should repay the price of basketball equipment with interest from the date of sale.  The complainant has asked for Rs.60,000/- as damages for mental agony.  The complainant has suffered mental agony due to defective goods sold by the complainant but he has not produced any material to award damages of Rs.60,000/-.  As such, he is entitled for damages of Rs.15,000/- towards mental agony.   Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following.

ORDER

The complaint is allowed directing the OP to refund the price of the basketball equipment of Rs.32,900/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from 20.06.2020 till the date of payment. 

It is further directed that the opposite party shall pay compensation of Rs.15,000/- + litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of order, otherwise, it carries interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till payment.

Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite party at free of cost.

  (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open Commission on 18^th day of September, 2021)                                            

• M.B. SEENA )         (L.MAMATHA)          (C.V.MARAGOOR)    
•  

//ANNEXURE//

Witness examined for the complainants side:

Sri.Ponnaluri Bala Murali Krishna, the complainant has filed his affidavit.

Documents marked for the complainant side:

1. Certificate u/s 65(b) of Indian Evidence Act.
2. Copy of the payment details dt.14.06.2020 and 20.06.2020.
3. Two Original photos.
4. WhatsApp communications copy (page No.11 to Page No.15).
5. Legal Notice dt.10.11.2020.
6. Original Postal receipt and Postal acknowledgement.

Witness examined for the opposite party side:                  

-NIL-

Documents marked for the Opposite Parties side:

-NIL-

• M.B.SEENA)         (L.MAMATHA)          (C.V.MARAGOOR)    
•