By. Smt. Bindu. R, President:

            This complaint is filed by Binu, Makkutty, Nenmeni Post, Sulthan Bathery against MY G (Future) care, Sulthan Bathery alleging deficiency of service against the Opposite Party.

            2.  Complainant states that the Complainant had purchased one LED TV of impex Company from the Opposite Party on payment of Rs.23,000/- after excluding the offer amount.  The Complainant paid Rs.8,900/- by cash and balance amount is being paid in installments of Rs.2,500/- each and the technician of the Opposite Party installed the TV in the house of the Complainant in the stand provided by the Opposite Party.  Complainant further states that the TV had some defects with respect to the sound system and on complaint the technician of the Opposite Party came to the house of the Complainant but the defect was not cured.  It is stated by the Complainant that on 02.04.2023, the TV which is fitted on the stand was fell down and damaged. Complainant states that the TV was fitted in the stand by the technician of the Opposite Party and it is only due to the negligence of the technician of the Opposite Party, the TV fell down.  Even though a complaint was made to Opposite Party, they did not even care to look into the matter and the Opposite Party had not enquired about the complaint of the Complainant.  Complainant states that the Opposite Party assured that there is 2 years guarantee and 5 years warranty for the TV and the stand.  According to the Complainant the above said attitude of the Opposite Party is nothing but unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party and Opposite Party is liable to compensate the loss sustained to the Complainant and hence the complaint for getting back the value of the TV and stand with 12% interest or to provide the Complainant a new TV and  stand by replacing the damaged one and for other reliefs.

            3.  Upon notice, the Opposite Party appeared before the Commission through counsel on 10.07.2023 but not filed version and not represented thereafter.  Since the notice is seen served to the Opposite Party on 02.06.2023 and since the period for filing version is over, the Opposite Party was set ex-parte on 20.07.2023 and the case was posted for ex-parte evidence on 31.07.2023.

            4.  Complainant filed proof affidavit on 31.07.2023 and Ext.A1 and A2 and MO-1 were marked.

            5.  Heard the counsel for the Complainant. 

            6.  The following questions are coming up for consideration:-

1. Whether the Complainant had proved deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. If so, compensation and costs to be awarded to the Complainant?

7.  Considered the matter in detail.  It is the case of the Complainant that he purchased an LED TV on the basis of the offer assured by the Opposite Party on payment of Rs.23,000/-.  The Complainant paid Rs.8,900/- as ready cash and he was regularly paying the balance amount in  installments at the rate of Rs.2,500/- each.  When the complaint of sound system of the TV was informed to the Opposite Party, the said complaint was verified by the technician of the Opposite Party but the defect was not cured by the Opposite Party.  On 02.04.2023, the TV which was fitted on the stand given by the Opposite Party, fell down and both damaged.  The TV was fitted in the stand by the technician himself, on behalf of the Opposite Party.  Even though the same was complained to the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party had not cared to check the complaint.  The Complainant had produced Ext.A1 Copy of Tax Invoice issued by the Opposite Party dated 25.02.2023 and Ext.A2 Copy of the warranty card, in which the date of purchase is noted as 25.02.2023.  In both exhibits produced by the Complainant it is noted the model as GRANDE 43 AU10 and Batch number as BC01KC1533A1794, which shows both are with reference to the same purchase.  In this case, the Opposite Party had not came forward to disprove the allegation in the complaint  and since the Complainant had established his case on merit the Commission is of the opinion that the Complainant has proved his case and hence Point No.1 is found in favour of the Complainant and hence the following orders are passed.

1. The Opposite Party is directed to replace the old and damaged  TV and stand by a new one of the same model to the Complainant or to refund the cost paid  by the Complainant
2. The Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards compensation to the Complainant
3. The Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) towards costs of the proceedings.

            The Orders to be complied by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of receipt of this Order, otherwise the Complainant will be entitled for 8% interest for the amount awarded as compensation from the date of order till realization.

Hence the complaint is partly allowed.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 18^th day of August 2023.

Date of Filing:-01.06.2023.

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-                   

MEMBER       :Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant:-

PW1.              Binu. C. H.                                                    Medical Rep.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1.                  Copy of Tax Invoice.                                  Dt:25.02.2023.

A2.                  Copy of Warranty Card.                           Dt:25.02.2023.

MO1.             Impex TV Grande 43.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-

Nil.                

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                 CDRC, WAYANAD.

Kv/