Karnataka

Bangalore 1st & Rural Additional

CC/87/2019

Classic Orchards Property Owners Association - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Aansh group - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. S.N. Hangaragi

18 Aug 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE BENGALURU RURAL AND URBAN I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, I FLOOR, BMTC, B BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-27
 
Complaint Case No. CC/87/2019
( Date of Filing : 17 Jan 2019 )
 
1. Classic Orchards Property Owners Association
Behid Meenakshi temple Bannerghatta Road Bangalore-560076 Represented by: President Subbu Hegade, Age 67 years Mob No:962023246
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. Aansh group
No.91,1st Main, 1st Cross,road, shreyas Colony, JP Nagar, 7th Phase, Bangalore-560078 Party Represented : Director
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B., PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.A. L.L.B MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 18 Aug 2020
Final Order / Judgement

18.08.2020

ORDER

        The complainant has filed his complaint against the OP to direct OP to install and restore DVR and 8 CCTV cameras near water tank, restore 4 CCTV cameras at Meenakshi side security gate, restore 4 CCTV cameras at Loyalla Gate Security gate, restore 2 CCTV cameras at MG side and at 268 along with other reliefs. 

        OP appeared filed its version and both parties adduced their evidence.  During the course of the trial, a Memo was filed by the OP, that he visited the site to inspect 8 cameras which were given a replacement and out of 8 cameras six cameras are in working condition and two cameras are not functioning, which was supplied by him and it is in bad condition and he has also filed the estimate for repairing the said cameras.  He has filed the estimate wherein for repair of two cameras he has charged Rs.3,900/- for 3+1 coaxial cable Rs.19,000/- BNC and power pins Rs.1,000/- testing configuration Rs.5,000/- in all including GSTs Rs.34,102/-. 

In response to the same complainant has agreed in the argument that he is agreeable for repair of the two CCTV cameras and restoring the same in the CCTV system in his premises. If the same is not done the very purpose would be defeated.  He has also mentioned that in the Memo filed on 13.09.2013 that complainant is agreeable for installation and restoration of two cameras and that complainant will provide proper power supply and the problem in the power supply will be rectified.

In view of the same, we order OP to rectify and repair the problems in the two cameras which OP has tested and found that there is some defect and install the same in the CCTV system of the complainant premises within 30 days from today for which complainant has to provide defect free, problem free power supply.  In case the complainant feels that, he will bear the other expenses as mentioned in the estimate, it can do it or else the amount estimated for the above work may be given by the complainant to the OP to get the said work done.  With this the complaint is disposed.

Parties to bear their costs.

 

MEMBER                         PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B.,]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.A. L.L.B]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.