Orissa

Cuttak

CC/114/2023

Dr Sunil Kumar Rath - Complainant(s)

Versus

Patnaik Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Self

15 Sep 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.114/2023

 

          Sunil Kumar Rath,

          s/o: Simanchal Rath,Plot No.3C/876,

          Sector-10,CDA,Cuttack-753014.                            ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

         PATNAIK ENTERPRISES

         Plot No.208, Cuttack Road,

         Bhubaneswar-751006,

         Dist:Khurda.                                                               ... Opp. Party.

 

 

Present:           Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                        Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

               Date of filing:       17.04.2023

  Date of Order:     15.09.2023

 

For the complainant:             Self.

For the O.P.                :             Mr. A.K.Sutar(A/R).

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.                                                            

          Case of the complainant in short is that the O.Ps had sold a defective Exide Battery of model, FEMO-DIN 44 And Serial No.A2H3C000535 2H31.  It is stated by the complainant that the O.P again provided a battery on 8.7.2022 on payment of Rs.7,521/-.  The said battery was also a defective one.  The complainant alleged that he had made complaint to the Customer Care of the O.P as well Service Centre but could not get any response from them.  It is further stated by the complainant that the O.P is required to provide free service during the warranty period but the O.P has charged price during the free service period.  It is stated by him that he tried several times for rectification of the defects in the said battery but could not succeed.  As the defects in the battery persisted as usual, the complainant asked the O.P to refund the cost of the battery but the O.P did not take any action to that effect.  Thereafter he sent a legal notice to the O.P on 3.4.23 which remained unanswered.    The O.P did not take any effective step either for rectification of the defect of the battery or refund of cost of the battery. Hence, he has filed the present case with a prayer for a direction to the O.P to refund the cost of the battery i.e. Rs.7,521/- and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant for his mental agony and harassment besides cost of the litigation.

          The complainant has filed copies of some documents alongwith his complaint petition in order to prove his case.

2.       The O.P has appeared through his authorised representative and filed his written version stating that the complainant has not purchased the battery from him.  It is stated by him that the original bill of the battery has not been filed by the complainant. It is also stated by him that if the complainant would produce the original bill then he would contact with Exide Industries Ltd. who is the manufacturer for replacement of the defective battery.  It is further stated by him that the complainant had never come to purchase the battery from him nor he had approached for replacement of the battery.  It is stated by him that the complainant in his complaint petition has attached a warranty free replacement delivery challan, which is a disputed one.  In the delivery challan, name of another person has been mentioned but not of the complainant.  It is stated by the O.P that if the complainant would produce the original bill with his registered mobile number as well as vehicle number, then he would take necessary step for free replacement of that battery.

3.       Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of the O.P, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a definite conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue no.II.

Out of the three issues, issue no.ii  being the pertinent issue is taken up  first for consideration here in this case.

The complainant alleged to have purchased the battery from the O.P on 8.7.2022 on payment of Rs,7,521/- but he has not filed any receipt/bill to that effect.  The xerox copy of the delivery challan filed by the complainant reveals that it was delivered to one “Pattnaik Enterprises” of Cuttack Road at Bhubaneswar.  The O.P has stated that the complainant has not purchased the battery from him.  The complainant has not made Exide Industries Ltd. who is the manufacturer of said battery as a party in this case, as he is a necessary party.   In absence of manufacturer, the complaint case cannot be decided.  The complainant has not produced any document or led any evidence to the effect that the battery purchased by him is a defective one and he had approached the O.P for removal of its defect.  The complainant has not filed any warranty card for the battery.  Be that as it may, it is doubtful whether the complainant has purchased the battery from the O.P or not?  Moreover, the complainant has not filed any money receipt towards the cost of the battery.  Hence, it is held that the complainant has not purchased the battery from the O.P.  As the complainant did not prove the fact that he had purchased the battery from the O.P, it cannot be said here that there is any deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.  Accordingly, this issue goes against the complainant.

Issues no.i & iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.

                                              ORDER

Case is dismissed on contest against the O.P and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 15^th day of September,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                                                                                                        

                                                                                 

                                                                                       Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                   Member

 

                                                                                  Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                           President