Delhi

East Delhi

CC/724/2014

ABID KHAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

OXY AQUA - Opp.Party(s)

27 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 724/14

Sh. ABID KHAN

S/O Sh. J.A. KHAN

OFFICE AT 33/127, TRILOKPURI

DELHI-110091                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   …….Complainant

Vs

1. M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING,

THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR/PRINCIPAL

OFFICER Mr. SAJJAD

487/85, MANGAL BAZAR ROAD

PEERAGARHI

NEW DELHI-11081

 

2. Mr. SAJJAD

PROPERIETOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER

M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING

487/85, MANGAL BAZAR ROAD

3165973609379.  

NEW DELHI 11087

 

3. Mr. NAUSHAD ANJUM (SALES EXECUTIVE)

M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING

487/85, MANGAL BAZAR ROAD

82315245005379.  

NEW DELHI-11087

                                                                                                                                  ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 12.08.2014

Judgment Reserved for: 27.05.2016

Judgment Passed on: 09.06.2016

 

Order By: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

The complainant Shri Abid Khan has filed this complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1)), Mr. SAJJAD, PROPRIETOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER (OP-2) and Mr. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3) as arrayed in the memo of parties. Complainant has alleged deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice followed by OP. Brief facts of the complaint are as follows-

M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1) is engaged in manufacturing, trading and selling of R.O. machine, MR. SAJJAD PROPERIETOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER (OP-2) is proprietor of M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1) and MR. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3) is the sales executive of M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1).

            MR. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3) approached complainant and convinced the complainant to purchase R.O. system. Thus being convinced by the rosy picture shown by MR. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3), the complainant purchased R.O. system (106) UV-9-S on 19/05/2013 from the OPs for a total cost of Rs. 8,000/- with warranty/guarantee of one year. It is also stated that the complainant paid Rs.5,500/- and Rs.2,000/- by way of cheque and a sum of Rs.500/- in cash to O.P-3 for which no receipt was issued to the complainant.  It is further stated that after one month of purchase of R.O., it stopped working properly. The complainant made several requests to the O.Ps. to remove the defects and replace the machine, but O.Ps. used to postpone the issue on one pretext to the other. On 20/12/2013, the O.Ps refused to remove the defect/replace the R.O. A legal notice dated 27/12/2013 was sent demanding the respondent to remove the defect/repair the machine or to replace it.

            The complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.8,000/- along with interest @ 24% till actual realization, sum of Rs.50,000/- being damage on account of deficiency in service and Rs.22,000/- as cost of litigation.

            The O.Ps. were duly served with the notice of the complaint, but did not put appearance, thus, proceeed ex-parte  on 15/09/2015.

            The complainant has filed ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit and has reiterated the facts mentioned in complaint. The complainant is relying on Ex-CW1/1 & Ex CW1/2 which are receipts issued by the O.P., Ex.CW1/3 is a warranty card, Ex-CW1/4 is a statement of complainant’s bank account, Ex-CW1/5 is the letter/notice dated 27/12/2013, this averments remain uncontroverted as OPs chose not to appear.

            We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the complainant and have perused the material placed on record.

            The complainant has proved that he had purchased R.O. system by paying Rs.8,000/- as cost of the R.O. and Ex.CW1/3 is warranty card that bears the date of installation and warranty period from 19/05/2013 to 18/05/2014. Ex.CW1/5 is the letter written by complainant to M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1). From the evidence on record, it is inferred that M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1) through Mr. SAJJAD PROPERIETOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER (OP-2), and Mr. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3) have indulged in unfair trade practice by selling the defective products and thereafter have failed to remove the defect. Therefore, M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1) is vicariously liable for the acts of MR. SAJJAD PROPERIETOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER (OP-2) & MR. NAUSHAD ANJUM, SALES EXECUTIVE (OP-3), thus, M/S OXY AQUA MARKETING (OP-1) is directed to refund to the complainant the cost of R.O. machine Rs.8,000/- along with 9% interest p.a. from the date of the purchase. We also award Rs.7,500/- towards harassment and mental pain suffered by the complainant which shall also include the cost of litigation. In case, the said amount of Rs.7,500/- is not paid by the O.Ps. within 45 days from the date of receiving this order, the same is also recoverable along with 9% interest from the date of the order till the recovery of the said amount.

Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

 

(SUKHDEV SINGH)                                                                               (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)              

      PRESIDENT                                                                                               MEMBER