Date of filing : 20-06-2014
Date of order : 26-11-2014
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.122/14
Dated this, the 26th day of November 2014
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
C.V.Gangadharan, S/o.C.V.Kunhiraman, : Complainant
Proprietor, Ragam Jewellery,
MG Road, Kasaragod.
(Adv.Shajid Kammadam, Kasaragod)
M/s.Qualitronics (Madrass)Private Limited, : Opposite party
99-A, Canal road, Giri Nagar, Kochi.682020
Represented by its Manager.
(Exparte)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
Complainant is alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite party as he purchased a security system and robbery protection for his shop from opposite party for an amount of Rs.9500/- in order to strengthen the safety measures, of his business. Complainant is a self employee eking out his livelihood exclusively out of his business entity. At the time of purchase opposite party has agreed to provide uninterruptable service even after warranty period, opposite party also assured the quality safety and efficacy . The technicians of the company have installed the security system to the locker for the business premises of the complainant at Kasaragod. In the ensuing time the technical wing of opposite party has disconnected the security system and robbery protection from the local in order to pave the way for installing the new locker. At the time of disconnection opposite party had agreed to connect the alarm system to the new locker on completion of the work. Immediately after the installation of the new locker complainant requested to opposite party No.2 connect the locker to security system, but has been postponing the same for one or other pretext. Accordingly on 21-04-2014 when the complainant contacted opposite party for service they refused to do so. As a result, security of the business entity is jeopardized. Complainant have enquired with local technicians but they are not amenable for the same by stating that technical complication of the alarm system opposite party is contractually obliged to provide the assure service. The act of opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service which caused mental agony physical strain and emotional insult to the complainant. Hence the complaint.
2. Opposite party served notice but not turned up. Name of opposite party called absent and set exparte.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief-examination. Ext.A1 marked. Heard the complainant. Complainant is self employed and eking out livelihood out of his business entity.
4. Here opposite party has agreed to connect the Alarm system to the new locker on completion of the work soon after the installation of new locker complainant requested opposite party to connect the locker to security system agreeing for service charge but opposite party has refused to do so. The attitude of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Due to the act of opposite party complainant sustained financial loss and mental agony. The loss and agony undergone by the complainant has to be compensated.
In the result, the complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to connect the Alaram system to opposite party’s business entity with Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.Service Invoice.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
