Andhra Pradesh

Kurnool

CC/22/2004

Sri.Nalband Khaja Meeran, S/o N.Nisar Ahmed - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Ramakrishna Electronics, Represented by its Ramakrishna, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri Mohammed Ishaq

30 Jul 2004

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/22/2004
 
1. Sri.Nalband Khaja Meeran, S/o N.Nisar Ahmed
R/o D.No.32-532, Bekar Katta Street, Kurnool
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s.Ramakrishna Electronics, Represented by its Ramakrishna,
Park Road, Kurnool
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
2. The Branch Manager, Akai Consumer Electonic India Limited,
81/88, Atlanta Balg, Nariman Point, Mumbai
Mumbai
Maharastra
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.C.Preethi, M.A., L.L.B., MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Before the District Forum: Kurnool

       Present: Sri K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

And

Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member

Sri.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member

Friday the 30th day of July, 2004

C.D.No.22/2004

 

Sri.Nalband Khaja Meeran,

S/o N.Nisar Ahmed,

R/o D.No.32-532,

Bekar Katta Street,

Kurnool.                         . . . Complainants represented by his counsel

                                                      Sri Mohammed Ishaq.

 

-Vs-

 

  1. M/s.Ramakrishna Electronics,

Represented by its Ramakrishna,

Park Road,

Kurnool.

  1. The Branch Manager,

Akai Consumer Electonic India Limited,

81/88, Atlanta Balg,

Nariman Point,

Mumbai.                        . . . Opposite parties 1 and 2                                         

 

O R D E R

 

1.       This consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed seeking a direction on the opposite parties to deliver him the D.V.D. Worth Rs.10,990/- or its value along with interest at 24% Per Annum, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the suffered mental agony and loss of interest on Rs.3,000/- paid to the opposite parties and for costs at the deficient conduct of the opposite parties in non delivery of the D.V.D. to him.

 

2.       The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that the opposite party No.2is the manufacturer of the Consumer Electronics goods to whom the opposite party No.1 is the Agent  sponsored a scheme by name AKAI SABSE BEST OFFER D.V.D. FREE WITH C.T.V. under which a purchaser of a  Akai Color TV would get  a D.V.D. worth Rs.9,900/-, Rs.10,990/- or Rs.11,990/- depending upon the contingency of India Cricket Team Winning the World Cup Tournament conducted during March, 2003.  Hence the complainant purchased an Akai C.T.V. Model No.2906 DLX 29 for S.15,000/- under an exchange offer on 14-03-2003 from the opposite party No., under a cash bill and obtained a D.V.D. coupon No.053771.  As the Indian Cricket team reached Final in the said World Cup Tournament the complainant paid Rs.3,000/- to the opposite party No.2 vide D.D.No.083039 to get D.V.D. Rs.9,000/- Delux Model.  But the opposite party No.2 not delivered D.V.D. to the complainant in spite of acknowledging the receipt of the said D.D.  As the conduct of the opposite parties not only caused loss of interest, but  also mental agony the opposite parties were caused a Legal Notice dated 10-01-2004 seeking for an immediate delivery of D.V.D. worth along with Rs.10,000/- as compensation, but as there is no response from the opposite parties, the complainant is  constrained to resort to the Forum for the reliefs.

 

3.       In spite of the service of the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party No.1 merely addressed a letter dated 10-04-2004 to the Forum and not much contested the case and the opposite party No.2 totally abstained the proceedings from making any contest.

 

4.       The said letter of the opposite party No.1 dated 10-04-2004 alleges that it has already informed on phone on 13-01-2004 to the complainant to take delivery of the D.V.D. PLAYER and the complainant has not turned up to take delivery of the same and hence requesting the Forum to instruct the complainant for taking the delivery of the D.V.D., immediately.

 

5.       While the complainant has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 besides to his sworn affidavit and an affidavit of the 3rd party, the opposite parties neither placed any record nor contested the matter.

 

6.       Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficient conduct of the service on the part of the opposite parties to enable himself for the reliefs sought.

 

  1. As the purchase of the Akai C.T.V. by the complainant vide Ex.A1 and issual of customers coupon in Ex.A2 to the complainant and the printed broacher as to the benefits of purchasing Akai C.T.V. mentioned in Ex.A3 and the Warranty Card in Ex.A4 issued to the complainant on purchase of the Akai C.T.V. and the Legal Notice in Ex.A5 and its acknowledgement of the opposite party No.1vide Ex.A7 and the extension of the validity of the offer till stocks lost alleged in Ex.A8 and the payment of Rs.3,000/- the D.D. and its acknowledgment vide Ex.A9 and Ex.A10 as are not denied by the opposite parties.  It is not remaining essential to go deep into the merits of the above said material in assessing the privy of the parties to this case proceedings and entitleness of the complainant  for the D.V.D. PLAYER.

 

8.       Hence the only point for remaining consideration is whether in the circumstances on the record whether there is any deficiency of the service of the opposite parties in non delivery of the D.V.D. to the complainant.

 

9.       The letter dated 10-04-2004  of the opposite party no.1 addressed to his Forum says that it has informed to the complainant on 13-01-2004 on phone to take delivery of the D.V.D., but the complainant only has not turned up for the same.  The sworn affidavit of the complainant and the third party Abdul Waheed filed in this case on 20-05-2004 during the pendency of this proceedings, says of the visit of the complainant to the shop of the opposite party No.1 on 08-05-2004 and request of the complainant for the delivery of the D.V.D. in reference to the supra stated letter dated 10-04-2004 of the opposite party to the Forum and on that the opposite party No.1 making them to wait for considerable time on the pretext of checking his go-down for the said product and there after requesting them for 15 to 20 days from there for the D.V.D. as the said stock is not available and when being questioned on the point of addressed letter dated 10-04-2004 to the Forum as if ready for the delivery the opposite party offering a D.V.D. worth Rs.12,000/- if the complainant pays an extra amount of Rs.1,000/- and ultimately declining to deliver the D.V.D. to the complainant on the pretext of nonproduction of original coupon by the complainant, paying a deaf year to the complainant’s representation, if its non availability due its filing in this case.

 

10.     The said sworn affidavit averments of the complainant and the said 3rd party were neither mis-guided nor challenged by the opposite parties as the opposite parties continuously abstained to the case proceedings. Hence the said averments which were on oath being not dis-credited are remaining worthy of acceptance and from them what follows is that the opposite parties were bent upon making tall promises without intention to comply them and evading the delivery of the D.V.D to the complainant on one or other lame excuses and thereby alleged in this case.

 

11.     Therefore, in the circumstances discussed above as there appears a careless conduct of the opposite parties with supine in difference to comply with the conditions of the scheme and keeping up in its tall promises the deficient conduct of the opposite parties and there by the deficiency of service to the complainant is made out and hence there remains every bonafidies in the complainant’s cause of action and there by his entitleness for the reliefs sought.

 

12.     Consequently, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to deliver the entitled D.V.D. or its cost to the complainant along with Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered and Rs.1,000/- as costs with interest at 12% from the date of the filing of this case till realization.  The opposite parties are to comply with the award within a month of the receipt of this order.

 

          Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the dictation, corrected by us, and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 30th day of July, 2004.

 

 

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT                                      MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined

 

For the complainant:- Nil                                    For the opposite parties:- Nil

 

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

 

Ex.A1          Bill dated 14-03-2003 issued by Ramakrishna Electronics, Kurnool to the complainant for Rs.15,000/-.

 

Ex.A2          Customs coupon S.No.053771 dated 14-03-2003 issued by opposite party No.1.

 

Ex.A3          Akai SAESE best offer broucher.

 

Ex.A4          Akai Customer’s warranty Card dated 15-03-2003.

 

Ex.A5          Legal Notice dated 10-01-2004 issued by complainant counsel.

 

Ex.A6          Postal receipts No.1256 and 1257 envisages that Ex.A5 sent to opposite parties 1 and 2 by RPAD.

 

Ex.A7          Postal Acknowledgement as opposite party No.1 as to the receipt of Ex.A5.

 

Ex.A8          Hindu Daily English News Paper dated 14-03-2003 (Advertisement if Akai SAB-SE best Offer).

 

Ex.A9          Xerox  copy of D.D.No.083039 dated 03-04-2003 for Rs.3,000/- given by complainant in favour of opposite party No.2.

 

Ex.A10        Endorsement on Ex.A3 by opposite party No.1 as to the receipt of Ex.A9.

 

List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:- Nil

 

 

 

MEMBER                                PRESIDENT                                      MEMBER

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri.K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B.,]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.C.Preethi, M.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.