DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF APRIL, 2024.
PRESENT : SRI VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT.
: SMT. VIDYA.A., MEMBER.
: SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
Date Of Filing: 23.06.2023.
CC/164/2023
Mrs.Reeja Bijumon, - Complainant
W/o.Bijumon.T, Elavungal house,
Kanjirapuzha, Mannarkkad,
Palakkad district,
Kerala-678 596.
(By Adv.K.Balasubramanian)
Vs
1. M/s.Bismi Connect Pvt. Ltd., -Opposite Parties
J.P’s Kairali Arcade,
21/80-10, Near stadium bus stand,
Palakkad Coimbatore road,
Palakkad, Kerala-678 001.
(By Adv.T.J.Lakshmanan)
2. LG Electronics India Private Ltd.,
Corporate Office, 34/565B,
1st Floor, Fortune Arcade,
NHLn, Palarivattam, Ernakulam,
Kerala-682 024.
3. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.,
A-24/6, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate
Mathura Road, New Delhi-110 044.
(OP2 and 3-Exparte)
ORDER
BY SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
1. Pleadings of the complainant.
The complainant purchased a double door Refrigerator manufactured by the 2nd and the 3rd opposite parties from the 1st opposite party on 12.08.2018 for Rs.55,150/-. The allegation of the complainant is that the product supplied by the opposite parties is of inferior quality and hence, the compressor had to be replaced twice and on 20.05.2020, the technician attending to the compressor complaint categorically advised her that the product is beyond repair due to inferior quality. The complainant sent registered letter to the opposite parties demanding replacement of the refrigerator, but they did not respond. Selling an inferior quality refrigerator amounts to cheating. Hence, this complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.
a) Order the opposite parties to replace the old Refrigerator with a new one.
b) Order the opposite party to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and;
c) Order the opposite party to pay the cost of this complaint.
2. Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. The 1st opposite party entered appearance and filed version. Their main contentions are;
a) The Refrigerator in question was purchased in 2018 and hence, complaint is barred by limitation.
b) As the complainant’s allegation is cheating, it is not maintainable before this Commission.
c) If the product is having manufacturing defect, the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties are responsible.
The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties did not enter appearance and hence, were set ex-parte.
3. The case was referred for mediation held on 07.10.2023, but could not reach any settlement.
4. Based on the complainant pleadings, the following issues were framed.
1) Whether the complaint is barred by limitation?
2) Whether the complaint is maintainable before this Commission, as it involves cheating against the opposite parties?
3) Whether the complainant has succeeded in proving that the Refrigerator supplied by the opposite parties is of inferior quality?
4) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties?
5) Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
6) Reliefs as to cost and compensation.
5. Inspite of repeated opportunities given by this Commission, the complainant failed to file proof affidavit and mark any documents in support her complaint pleadings. Hence the evidence of complainant was closed and case was taken for orders based on merits.
6. As per Section 38(6) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, “Every complainant shall be heard by District Commission on the basis of affidavit and documentary evidence placed on record”.
7. In the absence of proof affidavit and documentary evidence from the side of the complainant, this Commission is not in position to go into the merits of the case.
8. In the result, the complaint is dismissed. The complainant is not entitled for any reliefs.
Pronounced in open court on this the 23rd day of April, 2024.
Sd/-
VINAY MENON .V,
PRESIDENT.
Sd/-
KRISHNANKUTTY N .K,
MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the complainant: NIL
Documents marked from the side of opposite parties: NIL
Witness examined from the complainant’s side: NIL
Witness examined from the opposite parties side: NIL
Cost : NIL.
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission ProcedureRegulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.
