BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SHRI. P. SUDHIR                                :         PRESIDENT

SMT. SATHI. R                                   :         MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                            :         MEMBER

                                              C.C.No: 399/2013     Filed on 26/09/2013

                                            Dated:  30..07..2015

Complainant:

Sreekumar. K., T.C.13/2091(18), Kalakaumudi Road, Kannammoola, MCPO, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 011.

         (By Adv. Thomas Kochenayil & Selin Thomas)

Opposite parties:

1. Binith. P.R., Person in charge  & representative (Thiruvananthapuram), M/s. Technoguard, C 368-102(1), MRA 31/1, Nandanam, Maruthankuzhy, Thiruvananthapuram.

2. Regi George, Proprietor, Technoguard, Puthenmadathil Building, I.T.I Jn., Chengannur, Alapuzha, Kerala – 689 122.

This C.C having been heard on 29..05...2015, the Forum on 30..07..2015  delivered the following:

ORDER

SHRI. P. SUDHIR, PRESIDENT:

         The case of the complainant is that complainant purchased an Inverter on 24/04/2013 for him home purpose from the 1^st opposite party. 2^nd opposite party is the manufacturing unit in Alappuzha. 1^st opposite party installed the Inverter on the same day. The Inverter became defective from 3^rd week of June 2013 and the matter was informed to the 1^st opposite party and 1^st opposite party replaced the Inverter immediately, but replaced with another model ‘LUNA’ of the same capacity ie 1000VA. 1^st opposite party assured that this is the same equipment in another cabinet. The said Inverter worked till 7^th September 2013 and after that it started mal functioning. Complainant informed the matter to 2^nd opposite party. On direction of 2^nd opposite party, 1^st opposite party contacted to the complainant and complainant explained the trouble such as :

(1) At times the charger shows charging current of 75A whereas it should be maximum of 8A for the battery in use

(2) Presently the inverter has stopped to come on load when there is no power supply from KSEB indicates inverter switch “OFF” even thought the push button switch is in “ON” position.

On hearing the trouble 1^st opposite party told that the unit needs replacement and will arrange for the same from the 2^nd opposite party. Thereafter opposite parties not replaced the Inverter. Hence complainant approached this Forum for refund of cost of the Inverter and other reliefs.

         2. Notice sent to opposite parties. Opposite parties not turned up to contest the matter and opposite parties set exparte.

         3. Issues:

         (i) Whether there is unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?

         (ii) Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought?

            Complainant filed chief examination of affidavit and Exts. P1 to P3 marked.

         4. Issues (i) & (ii):  Perusing the evidence of complainant and documents marked. Ext. P1 shows that complainant has purchased Inverter from opposite parties for an amount of Rs. 6,250/-. Ext. P2 shows there is a warranty of 24 months and the defect arrives within the warranty period. Opposite parties has not produced any contra evidence. Hence we have no other option but to go along with the evidence of the complainant and we are of the opinion that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 6,250/- being the cost of the Inverter and Rs. 3,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs. 2,000/- as cost of this proceedings.

         In the result, complaint is allowed and opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 6,250/- the cost of the Inverter and Rs. 3,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs. 2,000/- as cost of this proceedings within one month from the receipt of this order, failing which complainant is entitled to realise the whole amount with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of default till payment.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. 

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of  July  2015.

Sd/- P. SUDHIR   :         PRESIDENT

Sd/-R. SATHI        :         MEMBER

  Ad.                      Sd/-LIJU B. NAIR  :         MEMBER

C.C.No: 399/2013

APPENDIX

  I. Complainant’s witness           :        N I L

 II. Complainant’s documents:

         P1    :  Invoice No. 310 dated 24/04/2013

         P2    :  Warranty card

         P3    :  Photographs of the sign board of Thiruvananthapuram office

III. Opposite parties’ witness                :        N I L

 IV. Opposite parties’ documents                 :        N I L

         Sd/-PRESIDENT

   Ad.