IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                                                                 CASE No.  CC/19/2022.

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:                  Date of Disposal:

   17.03.22                                   05.04.22                                    21.05.24

Complainant: Samir Das

                        S/o Lt. Gopinath Das

                        59/A/1 Amrapali Sutirmath Berhampore

                        PO&PS-Berhampore

                        Dist-Murshidabad, Pin-742101

-Vs-

Opposite Party:1. Shop In,

Proprietor/Partner/Director Pankaj Chowdhury

54, S.N. Bhattacharya Road, PO&PS- Berhampore,

Dist-Murshidabad, Pin-742101

2. Manager, Godrej Regt. Office, Godrej Industries Ltd.

                         Godrej one, Pirojshanagar Estern Express Highway Vikhroli

                        Mumbai, 400079  

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                           : Sanyukta Das

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No                : Avijit Gope

   Present:    Sri Ajay Kumar Das………………………….......President.     

         Sri. Nityananda Roy……………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

Sri.ajay kumar das, presiding member.

This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

            One Samir Das(here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Pankaj Chowdhury, Prop. Shop In and Anr. (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The material facts giving rise to file the complaint are that:-

                 The Complainant is a retired govt. employee and a very reputed person. The OPs have been carrying on business dealing in freeze, air condition and other appliances. The OP No. 1 carries on business at 54 S.N. Bhattacharya Road, Berhampore, Murshidabad(Air Conditioned Departmental Store), PO&PS-Berhampore, Dist-Murshidabad, Pin-742101.

                 The Complainant purchased a godrej refg 205 E 53 TDI JW Wine from OP No.1 on 05.12.20 for Rs. 15,300/-. After receiving said money OP No.1 issued case memo vide order No. 1370, Dt. 05.12.20.

                 Regarding the Refg. being godrej ref 205 E 53 TDI  JW Wine machine both the parties guaranteed for a trouble free entire service and to remove any type of defect or to replace a new Refg. within a period of 1 year from the date of purchase.

                 The Complainant has been facing troubles and found the refg to be defective  and gaskit problem of the Refg.  which is to be found almost damage for such reason the water system and cooling system and machinery system of the said freeze found to be inherent defect. The Complainant on several occasion intimated the OPs to remove all defects of the New Refg. There after legal notice sent to OP No.1 Dt. 20.09.21 but with some illegal motive only to harass the Complainant the OP did not accept the said notice, in spite of that no effort was made by the OPs to remove the inherent defect of the freeze machine and gaskit etc.

                 More than two month has passed but OPs did not solve the defect or remove the entire defect as claimed by the Complainant.

                 The OPs miserably failed to discharge his obligation in terms of guarantee given to the Complainant at the time of purchasing the said Refg. and the period mentioned in the notice dt. 20.09.21 had expired.

                 The Complainant failed to use this Refg. properly for family and he suffered a great mental pressure for their negligent attitude.

                 Finding no other alternatives the Complainant filed this instant case praying for directing the OPs to refund Rs. 15,300/- or to replace new freeze in place of defective one and to pay Rs. 5000/- as mental agony, harassment.

                 OPs appeared by filing Vokalatnama but they didn’t file W/V.

                 The record shows that on 13.09.23 OP No.2 filed a petition along with Vokalatnama praying for filing written version and his prayer was considered and allowed. But it is a matter of regret the OP did not file written version till 01.04.24. The Order dated 01.04.24 reveals that OP No.2 received notice on 11.04.22 but he did not turned up. Such being the position this Commission directed for ex-parte hearing vide order No. 12 dt. 01.04.24. Thereafter on 25.04.24 ex-parte hearing was held fixing 21.05.24 for final order.

                 Record shows that the Complainant filed evidence on affidavit which corroborates the complaint. Complainant has filed the money receipt dt. 05.12.20 showing that he purchased Godrej Ref 205 E TDI JW Wine for Rs. 5,300/-. The Complainant files document showing that the Gdrej Forst Free Refrigerator comes with a ten year warranty on Compressor and one year warranty on all other parts (except bulb, glass and add-on plastic parts) from the date of purchase, against the defective material or workmanship.

                 The Complainant files document showing call No. K1409152484 dated 14.09.21 and Call No. K1509153171 dated 15.09.21 for repairing the defect of goods. The Complainant also files the copy of advocates letter dated 20.09.21showing information to the OP No.1 for repairing the defect of goods. But the OP did not response to the above call numbers and the advocates letter. Here lies the deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.

            The case of the Complainant is supported by relevant documents and as such we are of the view that the Complainant has proved his prima facie case.

            The record further shows that the OPs did not turn up to contest the case of the Complainant. It indicates the OPs have nothing to say regarding the allegation made by the Complainant. Such being the position we are of the view that the prima facie case of the Complainant is strongly established and as such the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.                                                                                                                                               

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 17.03.22 and admitted on 05.04.22. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case is allowed.

     Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/19/2022 be and the same is  allowed ex-parte against the OPs with litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/-.

        Both the OPs are directed to refund Rs. 15,300/- or to replace new freeze in place of defective one and to pay Rs. 5000/- as mental pain, agony and harassment to the Complainant. Both the OPs are jointly and severally liable to provide the relief to the Complainant.

Both the OPs are directed to comply with the order of this District Commission within 60 days from the date of this order in default both the OPs are liable to pay Rs. 22,300/- (Twenty Two Thousand Three Hundred only) ( Rs. 2,000/- for litigation cost+ Rs. 15,300/- for the price of the refrigerator and Rs. 5,000/- for mental pain, agony and harassment) along with interest @ 10% PA to the Complainant from the date of this order till realization.

        Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

President

 Member                                                                                               President.