BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc.,M.Phil., Male Member
Wednesday the 01st day of July , 2009
C.C.No.190/08
Between:
G. Suryaprakash, S/o. Late G.Gopal,
A4-6, Plot No. 572-A, Silpa Singapore Township, Nandyal Road,
Kurnool - 518 003.
…Complainant
Versus
M/s. Philips Service Centre and Televide Service Centre, Represented by its Dealer cum Proprietor, Mr. P.C. Prathap Reddy,
40-301-7E, Upstairs, Opposite Variety Theatre , Bellary Road, Kurnool - 518 004.
..Opposite party
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. M. Sivaji Rao , Advocate, for the complainant , and Sri. B.Nagi Reddy , Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)
C.C.No.190/08
1. This case of the complainant is filed U/S 11 and 12 of C.P. Act seeking direction on the opposite party to replace with new music system in good condition with warranty , to pay sum of Rs.15 per day for 16 months as damages Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and cost of the case alleging deficiency of service of the opposite party in not returning the music system attending its repairs despite of several demands and approaches and laps of much time from 08-06-2007 and having received Rs.3,800/- for repairing said set.
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party has caused its appearance through its counsel and contested the case filling its written version denying any of its deficiency and there by any of its liability to the complainants claim.
3. The written version of the opposite party even though admits the receipt of a dead set of music system from the complainant for its repair it submits that the said set was repaired properly getting to it spare parts worth Rs.15,289/- and was made ready for delivery long back and the complainant has not collected it in spite of repeated requests of the opposite party by phone paying the due charges of its repair and so any of its liability to the claimed damages , compensation for mental agony and costs. It further denies any of payment of Rs.3,800/- alleged by the complainant towards repair charges.
4. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A4 and its sworn affidavit , the opposite party side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.B1 to B6 and its sworn affidavit.
5. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency on the part of the opposite party and there by the liability of the opposite party for the complainant claim.
6. As the complainant alleges the purchase of one F.W – V39 VCD Mini Hi-Fi System Video CD Vision 2VCD player (MP3) of Philips Company worth Rs.18,000/- from M/s. Pai International , Bangalore and not from the opposite party , the Ex.A1 – the users manual along with guarantee – remains with any relevancy to this case except to feel the purchase of said set by the complainant from said source .
7. The Ex.A2 – is a printed receipt dated 08-06-2007 of the opposite party . It envisages the name of the complainant and his address and receipt of one dead Philips system of Model. No. FW .V 39 for repair by the opposite party’s service centre . It further envisages receipt of Rs.3,800/- on 11-06-2007 , even though it does not bear the signature of its issuer . But the Ex.A4 – office copy of the legal notice dated 02-09-2008 caused to the opposite party for the complainant alleges the said payment of Rs.3,800/- by the complainant to the opposite party towards repairing charges and the said being not responded with any denial by any reply of the opposite party availing it as the earliest possibility for his reply if the said payment is false . Hence there appears any truth in the said denial of the receipt of said amount of Rs.3,800/- alleged by the opposite party in his written version . Especially when the said entry as to receipt of Rs.3,800/- in cash finds its place in the column of Ex.A2 meant for components replaced and repairing details . Even though the opposite party alleges the payment of Rs.3,800/- towards the cost of the new DVD Player Model .No. 3046 on 18-06-2007 , the said fact being not substantiated by the opposite party by any cogent material and entries in Ex.A2 as to Rs.3,800/ bears the date as 11-06-2007 there remains any cogency and relevancy in the contention of the opposite party as to receipt of Rs.3,800/- from the complainant . Thus there being any cogent material from the opposite party rebutting the same, the said payment of Rs.3,800/- to the opposite party alleged by the complainant remains established.
8. The Ex.A4 notice , which was acknowledged by the opposite party under acknowledgement attached to it , alleges the opposite party has endorsed on 15-10-2007 at Ex.A3 agreeing to pay damages if the set was not repaired and delivered back to the complainant within a week . Even though the said endorsement in Ex.A3 dates to 15-10-2007 and bears the signature of the opposite party which is similar to his signatures in this case , but the matter scribed there in is being not so intelligible to lend support to the contentions of the complainant as to the aspect of damages alleged in complaint especially when in the Ex.A4 notice there is any claim of complainant for damages from the opposite party .
9. The opposite party contends that the said set of the complainant given for repair was attends of its repairs expending of Rs. 15,289/- for its spares and services and the complainant is only at the fault in collecting of the said repaired set paying its repair charges of Rs.15,289/- . But there appears any bonafides in said contention in the absence of a return demand from the opposite party to the complainant for payment of Rs.15,289/- towards spares and services and repairing charges of said set either in the period prior to filling of the complainants case or any of the delegant approaches of the opposite party in responding to the Ex.A4 notice with any of said contentions know taken in its written version and in the absence of substantiation of the so called phone intimations given to the complainant placing the phone bills of the relevant month envisaging the list of the phone numbers of the complainant mentioned in Ex.A2 , to which the opposite party might have phoned to wards his endeavor of requesting the complainant to collect the repaired set paying the due amount of its repair. Thus there being any bonafidies in the said contention of the opposite party as to the charges due from the complainant for spares and services rendered to said set in its repair and in the absence of the details in written version and sworn affidavit of the opposite party as to this spare parts and their cost provided to said set for effecting its repair the Ex.B1 to B4 – stock summary showing the price of item pertaining to set type FWV 28 , FWV 39 / 21 , FWV 39 / 21 M and FWV 28/21 while the complainant’s set given for repair was said to be of model FWV – 39 , leaves any relevancy for its appreciation in this case.
10. In the same way , as the instrument delivered to the opposite party by the complainant for effecting repair is stated in Ex.A4 , complaint and written version of the opposite party as FW – V 39 VCD Mini HI FI System Video CD version 2 VCD Player MP 3 , the Ex.B5 a printer broacher envisaging various other models of DVD Players in Philips make bears any relevancy for its appreciation in this case.
11. While the matter stood thus , during the pendency of this case, the opposite party has delivered to the complainant the repaired set in its satisfactory working condition to the complainant vide Ex.B6 on 29-04-2009 i.e about 6 months after to the institution of the complaint. Hence the contentions in the written version that the said set was ready for delivery long back after its needed repairs being attended and the fault is totally on the complainant in collecting back the repaired set paying back the due charges of its repair in spite of several repeated requests by opposite party on phone appears to be a plea for plea sake without any substance of truth there in .
12. Further , the very delivery of repair set on 29-04-2006 vide Ex.B6 to the complainant envisages the complainant was deprived of the said set for more than any reasonable time at the cost of his mental agony and constrained him to the forum for redressal of his grievances. Therefore the complainant is remaining entitled to an amount of Rs.2,000/- as compensation for his mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of this case.
13. As the repaired said set was delivered to the complainant to his satisfaction as to its working condition during pendency of this case vide Ex.B6, the first relief’s sought in complaint is working infractuous for passing an order as sought.
14. Consequently, in the result of the above discussion ,the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental agony suffered and Rs.1,000/- as cost of this case within a month of receipt of this order. In default the opposite party shall pay the supra stated award with 12% interest from the date of default till realization.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her , corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 1st day of July, 2009.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT MALE MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. User manual along with guarantee.
Ex.A2. Receipt dated 08-06-2007 issued by OP.
Ex.A3. Endorsement of OP on the requisition of Ex.A2 dated
15-10-2007.
Ex.A4. Office copy of legal notice dated 02-09-2008 along with
postal receipt and acknowledgement.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Computer generated stock summary of Kurnool Televideo
service center spare code no. 313911832250.
Ex.B2. Computer generated stock summary of Kurnool Televideo
service center spare code no. 313911052090.
Ex.B3. Computer generated stock summary of Kurnool Televideo
service center spare code NO.996500005010.
Ex.B4. Computer generated stock summary of Kurnool Televedio service center spare code NO. 313911877780.
Ex.B5. Philips DVD Catalogue including for the model DVP 3046.
Ex.B6. Philips Video CD player.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT MALE MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite party
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
