Orissa

Cuttak

CC/64/2018

Anil Kumar Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Shree Laxmi Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

R K Pattanaik & associates

11 Oct 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C. No.64/2018

 

Sri Anil Kumar Das,

S/o: Shri Krushna Prasad Das,

Plot No.C/72,Sector-7,CDA,

Markat Nagar,Cuttack-14..

.                                       ... Complainant.

          Vrs.

 

The Proprietor,

M/s. Shree Laxmi Enterprises,

HD Security System,42/B.Bima Vihar,

                   CDA,Cuttack-14.

 

Present:         Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                      Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    13.06.2018

Date of Order:  11.10.2023

 

For the complainant:           Mr. R.K.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P.                :             Mr. R.L.Biswal,Adv. & Associates.

         

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.      

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that he had purchased one Close Circuit Camera with monitor and other equipments from the O.P on 20.10.2017 vide bill no.180 by paying a consideration of Rs.17,000/-.  The said CCTV camera was installed in the premises of the complainant on 21.10.17.  But the complainant noticed that the said camera was unable to capture images properly. Such fact was immediately intimated to the O.P but when the O.P did not respond even though the complainant had waited for two months, he had to file this case after issuance of legal notice to the O.P on 1.5.2018.  The complainant thus has prayed for refund of the cost of the CCTV camera with monitor and other installation charges to the tune of Rs.17,000/- from the O.P together with a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation towards his mental agony and harassment and further a cost of Rs.10,000/- towards his legal expenses.  The complainant has further prayed for any other order as deemed fit and proper.

          Together with his complaint petition, he has filed copies of certain documents in order to prove his case.

2.       The O.P has contested this case and has filed his written version wherein he has stated that after receiving complaint from the complainant, he had taken the said CCTV camera of the complainant and has repaired the same which is ready for delivery to the complainant.  Thus, according to him there was no deficiency in service nor had he practised any unfair trade.  It is thus prayed by the O.P to dismiss the complaint petition as filed.

3.       Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of the O.P, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a definite conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and if the O.P had practised any unfair trade ?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue no.II.

Out of the three issues, issue no.ii  being the pertinent issue is taken up  first for consideration here in this case.

After perusal of the contents of the complaint petition, the written version and copies of documents as filed in this case, the written notes of submissions of either parties, it is noticed that the purchase of the CCTV camera with monitor alongwith other equipments from the O.P by the complainant is not disputed.  The complainant alleges that on the very next day when the said CCTV camera was installed in his premises i.e. on 21.10.17, it was noticed that the said camera was unable to capture any image for which he has requested the O.P for its replacement/repair.  Annexure-2 as filed by the complainant shows that he had also issued a legal notice to O.P in this context.  Per contra, it is the plea of the O.P that he had taken the defective CCTV camera of the complainant which he had repaired and the same is ready for its delivery to the complainant.  The complainant is silent about such submission as made by the O.P. There is no scrap of document in order to apprise this Commission that if infact the O.P after receiving the complaint from the complainant had taken back the said CCTV camera which he had sold to the complainant and thereafter had repaired it.  He has also not produced any document in order to apprise this court that if he had intimated the complainant stating therein that he had repaired the defective CCTV camera which is now ready to be received by the complainant.  Thus, in absence of any such cogent evidence, the plea as taken by the O.P appears to be ridiculous.  After considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Commission is of  opinion that infact by not responding to the allegation of the complainant about the CCTV camera that which he had purchased from the O.P was unable to capture image after it was installed at the premises of the complainant clearly indicates that there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and also it indicates the practice of unfair trade by the O.P. Accordingly, this issue goes in favour of the complainant.

Issues no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is undoubtedly maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence, it is so ordered;

                                              ORDER 

The case is decreed on contest against O.P.  Thus, the O.P is directed to refund the cost of the CCTV camera with monitor & other equipment to the complainant to the tune of Rs.17,000/-.  The O.P is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant towards his mental agony and harassment together with a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of his litigation. This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 11^th day of   October,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.         

                                                                                              Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                    President

                     

                                                                                                              

                                                                                             Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                          Member