Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/159/2018

Vinaykumar.B S/o A.N.Basappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pai Electronics Limited - Opp.Party(s)

InPerson

17 Nov 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:14.08.2018

DISPOSED  ON:17.11.2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO:159/2018

 

DATED:  17^th NOVEMBER 2018

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                          B.A., LL.B.,

SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc., MBA., DHA.,             : LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT	Vinaykumar. B S/O A.N.Basappa, Stadium Road, 1st Cross, N.Iyanna Colony, Chitradurga   (In-person)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Pai Electronics Limited, Opp Shankar Talkies, B.D Road, Chitradurga.   2. Micromax Informatics Ltd., Plot N.21/14, BlockA, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi.   3. Micromax Service Center, Opp To Karnataka Lokayuktha Office,1st Main Road,5th Cross, K.B Extension, Davangere-5775001   (exparte)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to return the price of the TV i.e., Rs.39,990/- along with interest and to grant such other reliefs.

2.     The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, on 26.01.2016, he purchased one Micromax LED 50’ L50B6000FHD TV from OP No.1 i.e., Pai Electronics, Chitradurga who is the dealer manufactured by OP No.3, the Micromax Informatics Ltd., New Delhi and OP No.3 is the Service Centre. The OP No.1 has given warranty for one year.  But within one year from the date of purchasing the above said TV, it started giving problem and stopped working completely on 04.09.2017.  On the same day, complainant about the defects found in the TV to OP No.1, but, OP No.1 did not respond properly.  Thereafter, on 04.12.2017 the same has been informed to OP No.2 and as per the direction of OP No.2, the complainant send the TV to OP No.3, the service centre.  But, till today, OP No.2 has not repaired the same on the ground that, the spare parts are not available in the market.   The OPs have supplied the defective TV which is having manufacturing defects which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and therefore, prayed for allowing the complaint.

3.     In spite of service of notice to the OPs did not appear before this Forum in person or through their Counsels and therefore, they to the OP No.3 but, it did not turn up and therefore, OP No.3 placed ex-parte.

4.     Complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-10 got marked and closed his side. 

5.     Arguments heard.

6.     Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaint are that;

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OP No.1 has supplied defective TV to the complainant manufactured by OP No.2 and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

        7.     Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

        Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative.

        Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.     It is not in dispute that,the complainant has purchased one Micromax LED 50’ L50B6000FHD TV from OP No.1 on 26.01.2016 by paying an amount of Rs.39,990/-.  After purchasing the above said TV within few months, some problems arisen i.e., there is no display and the pictures not seen properly and other problems.  The complainant has intimated the same to OP No.1, OP No.1 did not respond properly.  After that, the complainant visited the OP No.3, the service centre for repairs, but till today, OP No.3 has not repaired the TV on the ground that, the spare parts will not be available in the market.   Here the OP No.2 is the manufacturer, OP No.3 is the service centre and OP No.1 is the dealer, they are jointly and severally committed deficiency in service for non-solving the problems found in the TV.  The OP No.1 is a dealer, it sold the articles whatever send by the manufacture on commission basis.  The complainant has relied upon Ex.A-1 to 10 documents.  According to the complainant, the complainant has purchased one Micromax LED TV from OP No.1 as per Ex.A-1 i.e., Bill.  Ex.A-2 is the warranty card issued by the OP No.2.  All the documents produced by the complainant clearly shows that, the complainant is having a good case and complainant has proved that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs.  Moreover, the OPs have not appeared before this Forum and not filed any version or documents to disprove the case of the complainant.    

9.     We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant.  According to the complainant, he purchased Micromax LED 50’ L50B6000FHD TV from OP No.1 on 26.01.2016 by paying a sum of Rs.39,990/- manufactured by  OP No.2.  At the time of purchasing the TV, OP No.1 has issued a bill and warranty card to the complainant as per Ex.A-1 and A-2 which clearly shows that, the warranty is of one year and.  The said TV started giving problem within few months, the same has been informed to the OPs, but, the OPs are not able to rectify the problems found in the TV.  The defects found in the TV is within warranty period and the exhibits produced by the complainant clearly shows that, the OPs have jointly and severally committed a deficiency of service in curing the defects found in the TV.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.

 

          10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is further ordered that the OPs are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.39,990/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of purchasing the TV till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant. 

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

            (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 17/11/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)

           

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined onbehalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Tax Invoice
02	Ex-A-2:-	Warranty card
03	Ex-A-3 to 5:-	Whatsup messages
04	Ex-A-6 to 10:-	Whatsup pictures

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**