By Jayasree Kallat, Member:

            The complainant purchased Mosquito Bat in the brand of hunter Mosquito on 5-9-08 for an amount of Rs.325/- from the opposite party.  Opposite party had issued quality for the bat.  The bat became defective and useless within a few months of purchase.  Complainant had informed this matter immediately to the opposite party.  Opposite party had informed the complainant that they will replace the bat after intimating the manufacturer.  Even though complainant approached the opposite party three to four times.  Opposite party did not replace the bat or give any definite reply.  Complainant is alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties.

            Notice sent to the opposite party was returned with an endorsement and refused by opposite party.  Complainant had taken steps paper publication against the opposite party was produced on 9-10-09.  Opposite party was called absent and set exparte.  The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 were marked on complainant’s side.  Complainant has produced the Mosquito bat before the Forum.  M.O1 was identified and return back to the complainant, on condition to produce the bat whenever Forum demands.  From the evidence and Exts. the case of the complainant is proved.  Even though the complainant had reported the defects to the opposite party and approached them three to four times to get it replace opposite party did not take any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant.  Hence the Forum is of the opinion that opposite party was deficient in their service and also conducted unfair trade practice.  Hence Forum is of the opinion that complainant is entitled to get back the amount of Rs.325/-, cost of the bat.

            In the result the petition is allowed and the opposite party is directed to return back Rs.325/- cost of the bat along with cost of Rs.250/- to the complainant.  On paying the amount opposite party can take back the bat from the complainant.  The opposite party is directed to comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

Pronounced in the open court this the 31^st day of October 2009.

                                Sd/-                                       Sd/-                             Sd/-

                        PRESIDENT                           MEMBER                    MEMBER

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant.

A1.  Bill dt. 5-9-08 issued by O.P. to the complainant.

A2.  Copy of Lawyer notice dt. 31-7-09.

A3.   Returned envelope.

Documents exhibited for the opposite party.

            Nil

Witness examined for the complainant.

PW1.  A. Sumesh Kumar (Complainant)

Witness examined for the opposite party.

            None.

                                                            Sd/- President

                                    // True copy //

                        (Forwarded/By order)

                 SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT.