IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
KEONJHAR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 32 OF 2017
Sri Chandra Sekhar Mahanta,aged about 31 years,
Son of Raghunatha Mahanta, of Village/Po-Kalinga,
P.s-Baria,
Dist-Keonjhar,758002………………………………………………………………………...…..… Complainant
Versus
M/S Mint Mobile Private Ltd,
At- Dhangarapada , N.H. 49
P.O- Keonjhargarh, Dist-Keonjhar
(Odisha)758001 …………………………………………………………………………………..………....Opp.Parties
Present:
Smt. B.Giri, President (I/C)
Sri Bharat Bhusan Das (Member)
Advocate for complainant- G.N Jena & Rudranarayan Mahanta.
Advocate for Op - None. (Op is set exparte)
Date of hearing - 20.07.2018 Date of Order- 03.09.2018
B.Giri President (I/C) - One case of the complainant in brief, is that complainant being a farmer, during oct 2016 met op for a power tiller loan on subsidy basic and Op assured the complainant to arrange govt subsidy of Rs 75000/-(seventy five thousand) only which made available to the farmer and the subsidy amount of Rs 75000/- will be deposited automatically in the account of complainant within a month in case complainant will purchase RHI No-15DI power tiller, accordingly on payment of Rs 1,50,000/-on 14.10.16 complainant purchased the said power tiller from the Op bearing Engine no,96205734 and chasis no-DF1515000001602879 and during sale of power tiller Op supplied a farmer identification bearing no KEO 60621 to complainant for availing govt subsidy but did not provide any sale letter or manual book to the complainant and the said power tiller became defective which was brought to the notice of Op and finally on 1.8.17 complainant sent a legal notice to the Op for repair of power tiller but Op did not paid any heed as a result complainant could not utilize the said power tiller during cultivation season and it is lying unutilized with him since then for which complainant apprehend that Op sold an old and defective power tiller to him and hence this complainant with a prayer to refuse the sale price of the power tiller amounting to Rs 1,50,000/-or in alternative to repair the defective power tiller to running condition and further to pay Rs 75,000/- towards subsidy amount as the complainant could not avail the same due to non taking of steps by the op, and further pay. Compensation for mental agony, financial loss and cost of litigation.
After service of 1st notice on 28.8.17 it could not be served and returned with postal remark “not known” for which further steps given by complainant towards fresh service of notice which was sent through regd post to op on 18.11.17 which was presumed to be served as till 19.1.18 not returned and hence it held that service of notice became sufficient.
Op did not file any version and not participated in this case and remained absent and hence Op is set exparte on 19.1.18.Heard the Id counsel for the complainant.
Admittedly the complainant was purchased the power tiller and it is evident from Rt no 108. Dt 14.10.16 supplied by Op to complainant, but in support of subsidy complainant failed to file any cogent evidence but from the legal notice it is evident that op has not supplied manual book and sale letter to the complainant and not even come forward to rectify the defects in the power tiller sold to complainant as a result complainant could not utilize the power tiller till date causing financial loss and put to mental agony and also unable to use his hard earn money for his farming purpose.
In the above discussion we held that Op is deficient in service as it is the duty of the Op to provide service for the goods sold to complainant but in the present case Op sold the goods but did not came forward to give service.
Under these facts and circumstance, we hold that Op is not at all liable for govt subsidy as govt subsidy is made available to complainant by agriculture department after completion of all para furnia of the scheme but in the present case that has not been made.
But we hold that Op is liable for not giving service to complainant despite receipt of legal notice towards repair of defective power tiller sold to the complainant.
And hence, it is ordered and Op is directed to repair the power tiller of complainant and make it to good and running condition with satisfaction of complainant at his own cost within 30 days of receipt of this order and further to pay the complainant a sum of 5000/-(five thousand)only towards compensation for mental agony and harassment, and Rs 1000/- towards cost of litigation within prescribed period of this order or else Op will be held liable to pay for total cost of power tiller with cost and compensation as awarded.
The case is accordingly disposed of.
Pronounced on 3rd September 2018
I agree I agree
Sri B. B. Das Smt B. Giri
Member (m) President (I/C)
DCDRF,Keonjhar DCDRF,Keonjhar
Dictated & Corrected by
(Smt B. Giri )
(President) I/C
DCDRF, Keonjhar
