DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE

PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB         : PRESIDENT

Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) :  MEMBER

Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER

Friday the 31^st day of March 2023

C.C.28/2021

Complainant

Vineesh,

S/o Krishnan

Kizhakkethodi (H),

North Beypore,

Kozhikode – 673 015.

Opposite Parties

1. M/s.TCL Service Centre,

TCS Head Office India,

TCS House, Rave line street,

Fort Mumbai – 400 001.

2. Kannan Kandy Sales Corporation,

GSTIN/UIN, 32ACFK6606LIZE,

Mavoor Road, Calicut -04.

ORDER

By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT 

       This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

2.  The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:

On 16-05-2019 the complainant purchased one TCL LED TV paying Rs.10,900/-. The TV became defective and ceased functioning on 17-01-2021. The TV is having warranty of 3 years. On reporting the complaint, the technician of the second opposite party came to his house and inspected the TV and informed that there are serious defects and that either the panel board or the TV would be replaced. But thereafter nothing was done by the opposite parties. When contacted, the second opposite party asked him to wait for two months. But so far no positive steps were taken either to repair the TV or replace the same. He was put to great mental agony, inconvenience and hardship due to the act of the opposite parties. Hence the complaint claiming compensation of Rs.25,000/- including the cost of the TV.

3. The opposite parties were set ex-parte.

4.   The points that arise for determination in this complaint are :

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service

    on the part of the opposite parties, as alleged?

   2. Reliefs and costs.

5.    Evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts. A1 and A2.

6. Heard the complainant.

7. Point No.1 – The complainant has approached this commission claiming compensation of Rs.25,000/- alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The specific allegation is that the opposite parties neglected to repair the TV or replace the same during the warranty period.

8. PW1, who is the complainant, has filed proof affidavit in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. It is averred in the proof affidavit that the TV became defective during the warranty period and the opposite parties neglected to repair the TV or replace the same with a new one, in spite of reporting the complaint. Ext A1 is the tax invoice dated 16-05-2019 for having purchased the TV for Rs.10,900/-. Ext A2 is the copy of the certificate of the warranty. Ext A2 shows that the warranty is applicable for 36 months from the date of purchase. 

9.    The evidence of PW1 stands unchallenged. The opposite parties have not turned up to file version. The opposite parties have not produced any evidence to disprove the averments in the complaint or to rebut the veracity of the documents produced and marked by the complainant. The case of the complainant stands proved through the testimony of PW1 and Exts A1 and A2. The TV became defective and ceased functioning during the warranty period and the failure to attend the complaint amounts to deficiency of service. The complainant is entitled to get the TV repaired or get refund of the price. The act of the opposite party has resulted in mental agony and hardship to the complainant and he was not able to enjoy the TV. The complainant is entitled to be compensated adequately. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 3,000/- will be reasonable compensation in this case.

10. Point No.2 :  In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows:

1. CC.28/2021 is allowed.
2.  The opposite parties are hereby directed to repair the TCL LED TV of the complainant and make it in a sound working condition, or else, refund Rs.10,900/- (Rupees Ten Thousand and Nine Hundred only) to the complainant, being the price of the TV. It is made clear that the complainant shall not be required to pay any charge for the repairs. In case of refund of the price, the opposite parties can take possession of the TV from the complainant, after making payment.
3. The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
4. The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order.
5. No order as to costs. 

  Pronounced in open Commission on this the 31^st day of March 2023.

Date of Filing: 02-02-2021.

​

Sd/-

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MEMBER

Sd/-

MEMBER

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant :

Ext. A1 - Tax invoice dated 16-05-2019 for having purchased the TV for Rs.10,900/-.

Ext. A2 - Copy of the certificate of the warranty.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party

Nil.

Witnesses for the Complainant

PW1 -  Vineesh

Witnesses for the opposite parties 

Nil.

​

Sd/-

PRESEDENT

Sd/-

MEMBER

Sd/-

MEMBER

Forwarded/ By Order

                                         Sd/-

                       Assistant Registrar