Date of filing : 13-05-2010 Date of order : 30-09-2010 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD C.C.111/10 Dated this, the 30th day of September 2010 PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER Umeshan.P, } Complainant Ar.HC 1728, Qrts.No.14, A.R. Camp, Kasaragod (In person) Onida Service Centre, Old Press Club Junction, } Opposite party Kasaragod (Adv. Kusuma.M, Kasaragod) O R D E R SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT In nut shell the case of complainant is that the opposite party failed to rectify the defects of the TV in time which is having five years service warranty. According to opposite party complainant lodged the complaint on 28-04-2010 and a service technician checked the TV from complainant’s house on 29-04-2010 and found that TV was not working. There was power supply failure in to the TV. Hence another technician checked the TV on 3-5-2010 by taking an IC to check the power supply and it is revealed that several parts of the TV were ruined due to lightning. Hence the repairing of the TV from the house of the complainant was impossible. Therefore the PCB (Printed Circuit Board) of the TV brought to the opposite party’s service center. On verification the main IC of the TV found defective and fault and since there was no stock of the main IC of the TV, opposite party immediately informed the same to the Branch office in Cochin in order to supply the same at the earliest. Accordingly the same is sent on 13-05-2010 and immediately after receiving the same the opposite party got repaired the PCB and the same is found in good working condition on 14-5-2010 and therefore without any delay on his part on 15-05-2010 the opposite party taken the PCB to the complainant’s house and fixed the same to the TV and thereafter the TV is in good working condition. The opposite party has rendered service to the complainant in good faith without any delay on his part. Hence there is no deficiency in service on their part and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 2. Exts. A1 & A2 marked on the side of complainant No documents produced by opposite party Both sides heard. Documents verified. 3. It is seen that the TV taken for repair on 28-4-2010 is returned back on15-05-2010 itself. i.e. after 17 days. Further it is seen that the complainant filed the complaint on 13-05-2010 i.e before delivering the TV after repair to the complainant. The opposite party well explained the delay occurred for the repair. The complainant has no case that opposite party is willfully keeping the TV idle without any attempt to repair it. The delay caused cannot be considered as unreasonable. Therefore we do not see any reason to allow the complaint and award any compensation to the complainant. Hence the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts. A1. Customer’s Warranty Card. A2. Cash Memorandum. Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER PRESIDENT Pj/ Forwarded by Order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT | 
