BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 275of 2018
Date of Institution : 05.11.2018
Date of Decision : 14.06.2019.
Badal Singh son of Shri Nazar Singh, resident of village Sawaipur, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
M/s Shree Balaji Sanitary Store, Village Bappan, Tehsil and District Sirsa through its Proprietor/Incharge/Authorized person/responsible person.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA ………………. PRESIDENT
SH.ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL ……MEMBER.
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR……………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. K.S. Chahal, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Pawan Bishnoi, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that complainant in connection with purchase of Water Tank approached the op for the purchase of good quality branded water Tank, where the op allured and assured for the purchase of water Tank believing upon his saying and the fact remains that the complainant being impressed by the assurance for the original quality of sanitary items approached the op and purchased the whole of sanitary items from the shop of the op. Alongwith the sanitary items the complainant purchased the Water Tank of 750 litre capacity having the brand Name as “Balaji”, however at the time of supply of the said water tank, the complainant demanded the Water Tank of the registered company like Syntex etc. but the op himself assured the complainant that his Brand name is of ISI registered and approved and the op also given the guarantee of 30 years against the said water tank and also assured the complainant that in case of any kind of defect therein the said water tank, he would replace the same of his own free of cost. That only as per the allurement and assurance by the op, the said water tank was purchased by the complainant against the payment of Rs.3500-00 vide Bill no.613 dated 20.05.2014 as the said bill was issued in continuation of the Bill dated 616 dated 20.05.2014. It is hereby submitted that inspite of the proper installation of the water tank, there suffered leakage in the water tank supplied by the op on account of which the water tank rendered useless and the leakage in the water tank occurred only because of manufacturing defect therein the said water tank and this has been happened only because of inferior quality material used in the manufacturing of the said water Tank, as such the op by getting manufacture of the duplicate material in the water tank and then sale of the water tank under his own brand name, stating the same as ISI approved, thus the op have committed the act of cheating with the innocent consumers like the complainant and by doing so, the op have caused the wrongful loss to the complainant hence the complainant also reserved his right to launch criminal proceedings under Section 418/420 IPC against the op. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement and taking preliminary objections regarding complaint is not maintainable, complainant has no cause of action, no prima facie case and balance of convenience against the answering defendant, the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this forum etc. It is further submitted that the complainant himself demanded the said water tank. The op never given any guarantee of alleged 30 years against the said tank. It is further submitted that the op has not given any duplicate tank as alleged by the complainant. In fact an amount of Rs.6100/- were outstanding against the complainant, which he had not paid to the op after repeating requests and now in order to grab the said amount, the complainant filed the present false complaint after 4 years of the purchase of the said water tank.
3. The parties then led their respective evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The complainant has filed an affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has deposed and reiterated all the averments mentioned in the complaint, he has tendered the documents i.e. original bills Ex.C1 to Ex.C4, Legal notice Ex.C5, photograph Ex.C6.
6. On the other hand, the opposite party did not led any evidence except tendering written statement in evidence.
7. It is proved on record that the complainant has purchased a water tank in a capacity of 750 litre having brand name as “Balaji” from the op vide bill Ex.C1. As per the allegation of the complainant there is a leakage in the water tank and the complaint was lodged with the op for the replacement of the same but however, the replacement was not given by the op. It is settled principle of law that if there is any manufacturing defect in the product purchased by the consumer, it is legal obligation of the dealer/manufacturer to get the same repaired or replaced the same with new one of same make an model. Not providing such service clearly means to deficiency of service on the part of the op.
8. In view of above discussion, we allow this complaint and direct the opposite party to replace the water tank of the complainant of the same capacity with the same make an model with the new one without any cost within 15 days from the receipt of old water tank to the complainant and further directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as composite compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:14.06.2019. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
Member Member
DCDRF, Sirsa DCDRF, Sirsa
