Date of Filing: 17.05.2008<br /> Date of Order:22.08.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1145 OF 2008<br /> Manab Bose<br /> Parikrma Humanity Foundation<br /> No. 1846, C Block, 3rd Main<br /> Sahakarnagar<br /> Bangalore 560 092 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> M/s. Essem Power Systems<br /> # 84, 2nd Cross, Central Excise Layout<br /> Vijayanagar, Bangalore 560 040 Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986.<br /> The facts of the case are that the complainant has purchased 5.0 KVA lighting UPS system for the purpose of domestic use. The same was purchased on 13.12.2007 from the opposite party. After installation UPS worked only for few days and after that it stopped working. He lodged complaint with the supplier. He visited the house of the complainant and ended up in blaming the wiring of the house instead of rectifying the fault. Complainant got the wiring completely checked up by certified electrical engineer. The repeated reminder over phone / through letters, the opposite party is not taking responsibility of rectifying the fault of UPS. The opposite party has committed deficiency in service and is liable to pay compensation for mental agony and harassment. The opposite party is liable to replace UPS or refund the cost of the same i.e. Rs. 36,400/- and opposite party is liable to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and cost. <br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party by registered post. Notice was returned with an endorsement ‘Not claimed’. Opposite party has called out on 08.08.2008. He was absent. The endorsement “not claimed” was held sufficient service and opposite party was placed exparte.<br /> 3. Complainant was heard. We have perused the complaint and documents produced by the complainant.<br /> 4. The complainant has produced Tax Invoice dated 13.12.2007 to show that he had purchased 5.0 KVA lighting UPS system for Rs. 36,400/-. The complainant has produced Customer Service Report dated 29.01.2008. In that report it is clearly mentioned that UPS is not working in the column problem / fault observed and said customer service report has been signed by Service Engineer of the opposite party. The complainant has produced copies of letters addressed to opposite party intimating that machine was not working and not in use. It is stated in the letter that the UPS system worked only for few days and thereafter failed in working. The complainant has produced a letter of Shankar Electricals stating that the electrical wiring present in the residence of complainant is good in condition with proper connection. Taking into consideration of all the documents and the allegations made in the complaint it is very clear that the UPS purchased by the complainant from the opposite party is not working properly. The complainant made several correspondences and requested to rectify the fault or to replace the UPS. The opposite party has not properly responded to the request of the complainant. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The case made out by the complainant has gone unchallenged. The opposite party has not appeared and contested the matter. The registered notice sent to opposite party by forum returned with endorsement ‘not claimed’. So under these grounds it appears the opposite party has got no defence to make. Therefore, he has remained absent. There is absolutely no reasons to dis-believe the case put up by the complainant. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation. It intends to protect better interests of the Consumers. The protection of consumers is the need of the hour. It is the duty and obligation of the opposite party to supply the goods which are free from defects. The prayer of the complainant that opposite party may be directed to replace the UPS or refund the cost of the same is just, fair and reasonable. Taking into consideration of all the facts and documents I am of the opinion that complainant has proved his case. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> Order:<br /> 5. The Complaint is allowed. The Opposite party is directed to replace 5.0 KVA lighting UPS system purchased by the complainant with defect free new UPS system 5.0 KVA UPS immediately. In the event of not replacing the UPS system the opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 36,400/- to the complainant. <br /> 6. The complainant is entitled for Rs. 2,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite party.<br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2008. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> CV<br />