Orissa

StateCommission

A/153/2021

Bajaj Electricals Ltd - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pradeep Kumar Parimanik - Opp.Party(s)

M/S R.C. Panigrahi

07 Aug 2023

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ODISHA, CUTTACK
 
First Appeal No. A/153/2021
( Date of Filing : 07 Jul 2021 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 08/04/2021 in Case No. C.C. 85/2020 of District Nabarangapur)
 
1. Bajaj Electricals Ltd
45/47 Veer Nariman Road, Mumbai
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Pradeep Kumar Parimanik
S/O- Biswanath Parimanik Main Road Maidalpur
Nabarangapur
Odisha
2. Prop Prakash Electricals
Main Road, Papadahandi
Nabarangapur
odisha
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Dilip Kumar Mohapatra. PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty. MEMBER
 
PRESENT:M/S R.C. Panigrahi, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
Dated : 07 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

          Learned counsel for the appellant files written note of submission. The same be kept on record.

2.      Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents.

3.      The case of the complainant is that he purchased a ECOLUX CFL 30 W Bulb  of Bajaj Brand from OP No.1 on payment of  Rs.325/- on 21.4.2020 with one year warranty from the date of its purchase.  The said bulb became defective within the warranty period. When the complainant asked  OP No.1 to replace the said bulb, OP No.1 refused to replace the same. Challenging the inaction on the part of the OPs, the consumer complaint was filed before the learned District Commission, Nabarangpur.

4.      In spite of notice through paper publication, OP No.1 remained silent and as such was set ex parte.

5.      OP No. 2 filed written version stating that  OP No.1 has not sold the bulb to the complainant and thecomplainant is not a consumer. We find that the complaintpetition was filed without any supportingaffidavit and the receipt showing purchase of bulb from OP No.1. In the present case learned  Forum/Commission below physically examined the CLF bulb and came to a conclusion that the defects of the CLF  bulb is visible in naked eye as such laboratory test need not be done to prove the defect, the above finding of learned District Forum/Commission is contrary to settled position of law and is not sustainable in the eye of law. We found that the learned District Commission without taking into consideration the written version filed by OP No.2 and without appreciating the facts and law, arbitrarily passed the impugned order which is liable to be set aside and is set aside.

6.      The appeal stands allowed. No cost.

          The statutory amount deposited be refunded to the appellant with interest accrued thereon if any on proper identification.

           DFR be sent back forthwith.

            Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dilip Kumar Mohapatra.]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty.]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.