Date of filing :  08-10-2010

                                                                                             Date of order : 05-04-2010

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                C.C. 218/2009

                         Dated this, the 5^th   day of April 2010

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                       : MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI                             : MEMBER

Bhakthavalsalan,

S/o.Alami,

“Harisree” Nhakli,                                                            } Complainant

Mailatti.Po, Via.Udma,

Kasaragod.Dt.

(In Person)

1. Proprietor,

    Anuradha Enterprises, Bendichal Building,     } Opposite parties

    Bank Road, Kasaragod

(Adv.  A.Rajagopala, Kasaragod)

2. Chief Executive, I.F.B. Industries Ltd,

    Plot No.I.N.D.5, Sector.1,

    East  Calcutta Township,

    Calcutta-700078

(Exparte)

                                                                        O R D E R

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT

            Shorn of unnecessaries the case of the complainant Sri. Baktavalsalan is that the washing machine he purchased for Rs.11,500/- from opposite part No.1, manufactured by opposite party No.2 was defective during the first day of purchase itself.  Though at his repeated requests the technician of opposite party No.2 attended the defects they could not rectify it.  His request to replace the Washing Machine also rejected by opposite parties.  Hence the complaint claiming compensation and costs for the loss, hardships, mental agony suffered.

2.         For opposite party No.1 the dealer of the Washing Machine appeared and filed version.  But the registered notice issued to opposite party No.2, the manufacturer of the Washing Machine, was neither returned unserved nor the postal acknowledgment returned back.  Hence notice to opposite party No.2 was effected in a national daily.  Even after publication of notice opposite party No.2 failed to appear before the Forum.  Hence opposite party No.2 was set exparte.

3.         The copy of the purchase bill of washing machine is marked as Ext.A1 and the photocopy of warranty card is marked as Ext.A2.

4.         During enquiry the opposite party No.1 submitted that they were ready to replace the washing machine but complainant was reluctant to accept their offer and demanded  compensation for the mental agony and hardships caused to him.

5.         We can imagine the pinch one suffer when a costly home appliance like washing machine remains non-functional even on the day first of its purchase.  Hence the demand of the complainant could not be considered as an irrational one.

6.         Hence the complaint is allowed and opposite party No.1 is directed to replace the washing machine sold to the complainant with a new satisfactorily working one having the equivalent  purchase value.  Opposite party No.2 the manufacturer is directed to pay Rs. 5000/- towards the compensation for the mental agony and hardships suffered by the complainant along with a cost of Rs.3500/-.  Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

     Sd/-                                                         Sd/-                                          Sd/-

MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Exts.

A1.05-09-09 Copy of Cash bill issued by  OP NO.1.

A2. Photocopy of Warranty

    Sd/-                                                           Sd/-                                     Sd/-

MEMBER                                                       MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Pj/                                                                                Forwarded by Order

                                                                           SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT