By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
Case of the complainant is as follows:-
1. The complainant approached the first opposite party to purchase INSTA360 ONERS 4K EDITION ACTION CAMERA and after purchase when it was started to function found the camera is not working. On the day of purchase 13/01/2023 itself the complainant contacted the opposite party over telephone and informed the complaint. But it was stated that they cannot do anything to address the grievance. Then the complainant directly approached the opposite party and shown the camera to the opposite party and then it was stated that they are only dealer and the manufacturer is a different company and advised to approach the manufacturer. The complainant submitted that he approached the opposite party to replace the product even without using but the opposite party did not heed the request of the complainant. Complainant alleges deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the opposite parties.
2. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and on receipt of notice the first opposite party entered appearance and filed version.
3. The first opposite party denied the entire averments and allegations in the complaint. It is submitted the complainant is not maintainable either under law or on facts.
4. The opposite party admitted the complainant had purchased an INSTA360 ONERS 4K EDITION ACTION CAMERA edition action camera on 13/01/2023 at about 8.8 pm from the first opposite party for Rs. 29,499/-. But the allegation the camera was hanged, switch off and video was not working are denied.
5. The opposite party submitted that they are only a dealer and the first service was vested with the manufacturing company. The service center of the product is not liable for the defect to the product. The opposite party is selling the product of the company as well as other companies. The opposite party submitted that the complaint is defective due to non-joinder of necessary party and the complainant is liable to implead the manufacturer as party in the proceedings. The opposite party denied the allegations of the complainant and stated that the camera of the complainant is working now. It is submitted the complainant is having a YouTube channel named mar dome traveler and which is working in the name of the complainant. The opposite party denied the contention that the complainant suffered mental agony, financial loss and hardship due to the act of the opposite party. It is submitted the allegation is false frivolous and vexatious. Hence there is no cause of action against the opposite party and no relief can be granted in favor of the complainant. The complainant filed with experimental basis and so it is to be dismissed with cost to the opposite party.
6. Subsequent to the filing version by the first opposite party the complainant filed application to implead the second opposite party in the complaint as manufacturer of the product. Notice was issued from the Commission and the same was served on the second opposite party. But the second opposite party did not turn up hence the second opposite party set exparte.
7. The complainant and first opposite party filed affidavit and documents. The first opposite party did not file any documents. The documents of the complainant marked as Ext. A1 and A2. Ext. A1 is tax invoice issued by the first opposite party for Rs. 29,499/- dated 13/01/2023. Ext. A2 is copy of complaint submitted by the complainant to the first opposite party along with postal acknowledgement.
8. Heard complainant and first opposite party, perused affidavit and documents. The following points arise for consideration:-
1) Whether there is any defect to the product as alleged by the complainant?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled replacement or refund of the cost of
Camera as alleged in the complaint
3) Relief and cost
9. Point No.1 to 3
The case of the complainant is that he purchased the disputed INSTA360 ONERS 4K EDITION ACTION CAMERA from the first opposite party on 13/01/2023 at about 8.8 pm. On the same day when it was activated it was found the camera was not working properly. He immediately contacted the opposite party over telephone and thereafter on the next day itself approached the first opposite party directly with the defective product. But the first opposite party refused to attend the complaint and directed to contact the manufacturer. But the complainant so far did not get relief for his grievance. He filed this complaint for the replacement of product or refund of the product cost along with compensation and cost.
10. The first opposite party entered appearance and filed version admitting the purchase of the product but denied the liability. According to them they are only dealer and so the manufacturer is to be impleaded. But the perusal of version itself no details of the manufacturer is furnished by the first opposite party. In addition to that Ext. A1 the tax invoice also do not reveal the address particulars of the manufacturer of the product. Even then the complainant impleaded the second opposite party as the manufacturer of the product. Though notice served on the second opposite party, the second opposite party did not turn up and so the second opposite party is set exparte.
11. It can be seen that the complainant produced Ext. A1 and A2 to prove his case. The case of the complainant is that he purchased the product in the night on 13/01/2023 and on the same day he informed the defect of the product to the first opposite party. Moreover without any delay on the next day itself the complainant has taken the defective product to the first opposite party. But the first opposite party refused to honor the grievance of the complainant. Hence the act of the first opposite party amounts deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. It is an admitted fact the complainant purchased the product and without any delay of 24 hours he approached the first opposite party with the defective product. Hence the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed in the complaint. The first opposite party being the dealer from whom the complainant purchased the product and the first opposite party did not reveal either in version or in the tax invoice the address particulars of manufacturer the first opposite party is responsible to redress the grievance of the complainant. The act of the first opposite party amounts gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The complainant is entitled to refund the cost of the product 29,499/- rupees as per Ext. A1 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 13/01/2023 to till date of refund. The complainant also entitled a reasonable amount as compensation on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for which this Commission fix an amount of Rs.20,000/-as compensation. The complainant is also entitled cost of the proceedings Rs. 5,000/-.
12. In the light of above facts and circumstances the complaint stands allowed as follows:-
1) The first opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 29,499/- (Rupees twenty nine
Thousand four hundred and ninety nine only) to the complainant as per Ext.A1
along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 13/01/2023 to till
date of payment.
2) The first opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty
thousand only) to the complainant as compensation on account of deficiency
in service and unfair trade practice and thereby caused inconvenience and
hardship to the complainant.
3) The first opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand
only)to the complainant as cost of the proceedings.
The first opposite party shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled interest for the above said entire amount at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of order to till date of payment.
Dated this 27th day of September, 2024.
Mohandasan. K, President
Preethi Sivaraman.C, Member
Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant: Ext.A1and A2
Ext.A1: Tax invoice issued by the first opposite party for Rs. 29,499/- dated 13/01/2023.
Ext.A2: Copy of complaint submitted by the complainant to the first opposite party along
with postal acknowledgement.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Mohandasan. K, President
Preethi Sivaraman.C, Member
Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member
