Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
(3) Anil Kumar Singh
Member
Date of Order : 24.10.2018
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties repair the Television.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and litigation cost.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that she had purchased LCD TV after paying Rs. 11,500/- from Sangeeta Grand Plaza, Frazer Road, Patna vide annexure – 1. After purchase, warranty was extended from 11.11.2013 to 10.11.2015 after paying Rs. 843/-. After purchasing the aforesaid TV the TV became defective as the picture was not being fully flashed on the screen. Thereafter the complainant informed the service engineer who attended the TV in the house of the complainant on 22.02.2014. After examining the TV, the engineer informed her that as the defect was of serious nature, hence the TV must be brought to service center. Thereafter, on 24.02.2014 the TV was brought to the service center of the company situated near Basawan Park, Krishna Puri, Patna. It was deposited there as per request of the service engineer who gave a receipt as will appear from annexure – 2. The complainant was advised to approach the service center after 15 days. Thereafter, complainant approached the service center after 20 days but the staff of the service center informed her that the panel of the TV has been broken, for repair of which the complainant has to pay Rs. 9,000/-. The complainant refused and requested to return her TV and stated that she want to show the function of the TV. Thereafter she was informed by the staff of the service center that the picture of TV is not visible.
The complainant has further asserted that later on engineer Jay Prakash informed her on mobile that her TV will be repaired after paying Rs. 6,300/-. The complainant had stated that she had already deposited Rs. 2,000/- in advance but later on she was informed on 16.05.2014 that the panel of the TV has been received and hence the complainant will have to pay Rs. 9,000/- for fitting the panel. The complainant is bearing the charge of cable operator despite using TV with manufacturing defect.
The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite parties had supplied defective TV and TV had manufacturing defect. It is also stated that opposite party no. 2 had broken the panel of the TV and now opposite parties are asking the complainant to pay further Rs. 9,000/- for repair of the TV.
On behalf of opposite parties written statement has been filed stating therein that the broken article does not cover the warranty facility while the opposite parties are always ready to repair the TV.
On behalf of complainant a rejoinder has been filed repeating the fact stated in the complaint petition.
It has been stated that opposite parties are not ready to repair the TV rather they are demanding Rs. 9,000/- for repairing the same.
It has been further stated that TV was defective since the purchase and the panel of the TV panel was broken by staff of opposite party no. 2.
-
From careful perusal of complaint petition as well as annexures it is crystal clear that the TV was purchased on 11.11.2012 and the defect occurred since 22.02.2014. The fact that the TV was brought to the service center as per advise of the engineer has not been denied. There is no evidence on the record to show that at the time of depositing the TV with opposite party no. 2, the panel was already broken rather it is the case of the complainant that she had deposited TV with service center and at that time its panel was not broken and after some days panel of the TV was broken.
It goes without that opposite party no. 2 is instrumentality of opposite party no. 1 because it is working under the guidance of opposite party no. 1, hence opposite party no. 1 is responsible for the conduct of opposite party no. 2.
For the reason stated above we direct the opposite parties to refund Rs. 11,500/- (Rs. Eleven Thousand Five Hundred only) the cost of the aforesaid TV (vide annexure – 1) to the complainant within the period of two month from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite parties will pay 10% interest on the above said amount of Rs. 11,500/- (Rs. Eleven Thousand Five Hundred only) till its final payment.
Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation cost within the period of two month.
Accordingly, this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
Member (F) Member President
