DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 29^th day of November  2013 

Present: Smt.Seena.H, President

    Date of Filing : 05/10/2013

Krishnakumar.V.K.

S/o.Padmanabhan Nair,

“Sauparnika”,

Kuttiyil Lane,

Chittur – 678 101

(Party in Person)                                          -                  Complainant

        Vs 

Murukanandan

“Grihalakshmi”,

Behind Saundamman Kovil,

Main Road, Chittur – 678 101                          -                  Opposite party

 

 

Order by Smt.SEENA.H, PRESIDENT.

 

Complaint in brief:

 

Complainant who is working in Gulf country purchased a foreign made Television in the year 2000. In the year  2013 it became non functioning and the same was entrusted for repairs with the opposite party. Opposite party made believe the complainant that he was experienced in repairing foreign television also. IC Board and Remote was taken by the opposite party for repairing. After three weeks another board was fitted but television did not work. An amount of Rs.1500/- was paid to the opposite party. The grievance of the complainant is that the original IC board was retained by the opposite party and the TV is not functioning even after repair. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing the opposite party to return the original ICB and repair the TV, pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation to the complainant.

Opposite party set exparte.

The evidence adduced by the complainant consists of the chief affidavit and Ext.A1.

Issues for consideration are :

 

1.    Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party ?

2.    If so, what is the relief and cost entitled to the complainant ?

 

Complainant has purchased the television in the year 2000 is born out by Ext.A1. According to the complainant the same was entrusted for repairs with the opposite party in the year 2013 and opposite party not only failed to rectify the defect, but also changed the original IC board. Even though complainant has not adduced any evidence to prove the above stated fact, we believe the say of the complainant since opposite party has not adduced any evidence contrary  to the one adduced by the complainant. Admittedly Television is a 13 years old set. There is no evidence on record to determine whether the set can be repaired or not. Opposite party is not justified in receiving money without effecting repairs.

In view of the above stated facts and circumstances of the case, we partly allow the complaint. Opposite party is directed to return the original ICB to the complainant or pay Rs.500/-. (Rupees Five hundred only) Opposite party is further directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One thousand and five hundred only) to the complainant and Rs.500/-(Rupees Five hundred only) as cost of the proceedings. Order to be complied within one month from date of receipt order, failing which complainant is entitled for 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.

 

Pronounced in the open court on this the 29^th  day of November  2013.   

Seena H

President    

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ext.A1 –  Cash bill for Rs.1740/- dtd.8/11/2000 of M/s.Modern Home

 

 

 

 Nil

 

 

Rs.500/- allowed as cost of the proceedings.