This complaint is coming on for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri K.J.SAstry and Sri P.Dhananjaya Rao, Advocates for the complainant and opposite party called absent and having stood over for consideration, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking the relief to direct the O.Ps. to attend to the repairs of the T.V. and to grant such other reliefs on the following averments. The complainant purchased one Videocon LCD Colour T.V. from Soundary Shopee, M.G.Road, Vizianagaram. The said T.V. worked properly for some time and thereafter it gave trouble in its functioning. When the complainant went to Soundary Shopee and explained the problem in the T.V. the latter instructed the former to take the T.V. to the O.P. who is their authorized service centre. Accordingly, the complainant approached the O.P. and explained the problem in the T.V. The service mechanic of the O.P. came to the house of complainant and after verification of the T.V. he stated that there is a defect in the T.V. and took the T.V. to his service centre for repair. When the complainant went to the service centre of O.P. its men explained about A.M.C’s (Annual Maintenance Charges) scheme upon which the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4000/- on 31-8-2012 for the above said T.V. to enable the O.P. to attend to the repair work of the T.V. for a period of one year. Since the T.V. was always giving trouble the complainant was informing the said fact to the O.P. to get it rectified but of no avail. The complainant having believed the words of O.P. paid Rs.4,000/- towards the Annual Maintenance Charges of the T.V. but the O.P. willfully and deliberately avoided to attend the complaints made by the complainant.
Since the O.P. has violated the terms and conditions of the above said scheme it amounts to deficiency of service on its part. As the T.V. was always giving trouble to the complainant and as the men of O.P. did not attend to complaints made by the complainant, the complainant suffered mental agony and physical discomfort. Hence, he filed the complaint for the above said relief.
Inspite of service of notice the O.P. did not come to the Forum to contest the matter. To substantiate the claim of complainant he filed his affidavit evidence and got marked Ex.A.1 to A.6. Heard the counsel for complainant and perused the material placed on record.
Now the point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for.
It is the specific contention of the complainant that as his Videocon LCD Colour T.V. started giving trouble he went to the soundarya shopee from whom he purchased the said T.V. and explained the problem in the T.V. upon which the soundarya shopee introduced the O.P. as its authorized service centre. It is his further contention that he approached the O.P. and explained the problems in the T.V. upon which the service mechanic of the O.P. came to the house of complainant and after testing the T.V. he noticed the defect in it and took the same to the service centre for repair. It is his further contention that when he went to the service centre of O.P. he was told about the (AMCS) scheme and its validity for a period of one year. There upon the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,000/- to the O.P. on 31-8-2012 and as and when the said T.V. was giving trouble the complainant was informing the said fact to the O.P. during warranty period but the O.Ps. did not take care to repair the defects in the said T.V. The complainant in his complaint as well as in affidavit evidence has clearly stated about the payment of Rs.4,000/- to the O.P. towards AMC charges and though he has taken the T.V. to the O.P. as and when it was giving trouble, the O.P. did not rectify the defects.
Ex.A.1 is the bill issued by the O.P. for the amount paid under the AMC scheme. Ex.A.2 is the terms ad conditions incorporated in AMC document and Ex.A.3 T.V. purchase bill, Ex.A.4 job sheet issued by Soundarya Electronics, Ex.A.5 is the copy of notice got issued by the complainant to the O.P. and Ex.A.6 is the acknowledgement. The above said documents clearly reveals that the complainant purchased T.V. from soundarya shopee and when it gave trouble the O.P. was introduced to be their authorized service centre and when the complainant took his TV to get the defects rectified to the service centre he was told by the men of O.P. to join in the AMC’s Scheme upon which he paid a sum of Rs.4,000/- under AMC’s scheme to the O.P. to get the T.V. repaired during the warranty period.
Since the O.P. did not come to the Forum to contest the matter an adverse inference can be drawn to the fact that he has no case to contest.
Since the contents of complaint and affidavit of complainant, remained uncontroverted much reliance can be placed on the same to believe the case of complainant. The documentary evidence placed on record by the complainant also lends considerable strength to his case.
Hence, in view of the above said facts and circumstances we are of the considered opinion that as the O.P. did not attend to the repairs of T.V. during the warranty period there is any amount of deficiency of service on their part.
In the result, the complaint is allowed with costs of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) directing the O.P. to get the defects in the T.V. rectified as per AMC’s scheme within one month from the date of this order.
Dictated to the Typist, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 4th day of April, 2014.
Member President
CC. 66 of 2013
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For P.W.1 For R.W.1
DOCUMENTS MARKED.
For complainant:-
- Ex.A.1 Original copy of AMC charges bill dt.31-8-2012
- Ex.A.2 Original copy of AMC Terms and conditions dt.31-8-2012
- Ex.A.3 Original copy of T.V. purchase bill dt.17-4-2009
- Ex.A.4 Job-sheet issued by Swati electronics dt.7-3-2013
- Ex.A.5 office copy Regd.Lawyers notice to the O.P. dt.28-7-2013
- Ex.A.6 Original Acknowledgement of O.P. dt.31-7-2013
For O.P: NIL
President.
