IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA Dated this the 28th day of April, 2010. Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) C.C. No. 158/09 (Filed on 26.11.2009) Between: Somasekharan Nair, Thiruvathira Veedu, Kavumbhagom P.O., Kizhakkummuriyil, Thiruvalla. .... Complainant. And: 1. Proprietor, Attinkara Electronics, Kurisukavala, Thiruvalla. 2. Managing Director, Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd., Power Stores Division, Pottipathiplass, 2nd Floor, 25, Numkampakkom High Road, Chennai – 600034. 3. Manager, APC India Pvt. Ltd., G.349, 10th Cross Road, Panampalli Nagar, Ernakulam, Kochi. 4. Manager, Spectra Electronics, NH-47, Madhava Junction, Harippad, Alapuzha. .... Opposite parties. ORDER Sri. Jacob Stephen (President): The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum. 2. The complainant’s case is that he is a senior citizen. He had purchased an inverter with battery for Rs.13,500/- from the first opposite party on 20.12.2007. The manufacturer of the inverter is the 4th opposite party and the manufacturer of the battery is the second opposite party. The third opposite party is the servicing agent of the 4th opposite party. The said inverter becomes defective very soon from the date of purchase. The complainant informed the matter to the first opposite party over telephone. But there was no response from the first opposite party. Later, the complainant directly met the first opposite party and complained about the non-working of the inverter. Thereafter, one salesman visited the house of the complainant and inspected the equipment and opined that the complaint of the inverter is due to the defect of the battery. Thereafter, on 04.05.2009 a mechanic of the 4th opposite party came to the house of the complainant and examined the inverter and given a paper in writing showing that the battery is defective. On 21.05.2000 the complainant made a written complaint to the first opposite party about this. But there was no response from the part of the first opposite party, though he had a contractual liability to the complainant in this regard. The above said acts of the opposite parties is a clear deficiency in service, which caused mental agony and other inconvenienes to the complainant. Hence, this complaint for realising the cost of Rs.13,500/- and for supplying an inverter with battery without any payment with fresh warranty along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/- from the opposite parties. 3. In this case, the opposite parties are exparte. 4. On the basis of the averments in the complaint, the points to be considered is as follows: (1) Whether this complaint can be allowed? (2) Relief and Cost? 5. The evidence of this complaint consists of the proof affidavit and the documents filed by the complainant. On the basis of the proof affidavit, the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A7. After closure of evidence, the complainant was heard. 6. Points 1 & 2: The complainant’s case is that the inverter purchased by the complainant from the first opposite party for Rs.13,500/- become defective within the warranty period. But the opposite parties have not rectified the defects of the system irrespective of the complainant’s oral and written request for the repairing of the inverter. The complainant purchased the inverter solely for getting power supply during power failure. But due to the defect of the inverter, the very purpose of purchase of the inverter is not received to the complainant. The above said acts of the opposite parties is a clear deficiency in service, which caused mental agony and other inconveniences to the complainant. 7. In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant had filed a proof affidavit narrating his case along with 7 documents. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A7 on the basis of the proof affidavit. Ext.A1 is the warranty card of the inverter. Ext. A2 is the customer copy of Product Warranty Registration Card issued by the first opposite party. Ext.A3 is the carbon copy of the quotation/proforma invoice dated 18.12.2007 for Rs.13,500/- issued by the first opposite party. Ext.A4 is the retail invoice for Rs.13,500/- dated 20.12.2007 issued by the first opposite party. Ext.A5 is the Field Service Site Visit Report dated 04.05.2009 issued by the mechanic of the 4th opposite party stating “the battery complaint. Battery need replaced”. Ext.A6 is the photocopy of the written complaint dated 21.05.2009 given to the first opposite party by the complainant. Ext.A7 is the photocopy of the Advocate Notice dated 26.06.2009 issued by the complainant to the first opposite party. 8. For the opposite parties, there is no oral or documentary evidence as they are exparte. 9. On the basis of the contentions of the complainant, we have perused the entire materials on record and found that the complainant’s case is genuine. Exts.A1 to A7 clearly shows the deficiency of service of the opposite parties. Thus, the complainant’s case stands proved unchallenged and hence the complaint can be allowed, as there is a clear deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. Complainant’s claim for compensation and cost are not proved with cogent evidence. Therefore, this complaint can be allowed in part with reasonable compensation and cost. 10. In the result, this complaint is partly allowed as follows: (1) The first opposite party is directed to supply a brand new inverter and a battery of the same size to the complainant with fresh warranty for one year from the date of supply within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order along with a compensation of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) and cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) to the complainant. (2) The complainant is directed to return the defective inverter and the battery to the first opposite party on getting the new equipments. (3) The first opposite party is at liberty to realise the actual cost of the equipments from the concerned manufactures of the equipments. (4) In the event of non-compliance of the order by the first opposite party, the complainant is allowed to realise an amount of Rs.13,500/- from the first opposite party with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till this date along with compensation and cost ordered herein above and thereafter at the rate of 12% interest per annum for the whole amount till the whole realisation. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of April, 2010. (Sd/-) Jacob Stephen (President) Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member) : (Sd/-) Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) : (Sd/-) Appendix: Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant: A1 : Warranty card. A2 : Customer copy of Product Warranty Registration Card issued by the first opposite party. A3 : Carbon copy of the quotation/proforma invoice dated 18.12.2007 for Rs.13,500/- issued by the first opposite party. A4 : Retail invoice for Rs.13,500/- dated 20.12.2007 issued by the first opposite party. A5 : Field Service Site Visit Report dated 04.05.2009 issued by the mechanic of the 4th opposite party. A6 : Photocopy of the written complaint dated 21.05.2009 given to the first opposite party by the complainant. A7 : Photocopy of the Advocate Notice dated 26.06.2009 issued by the complainant to the first opposite party. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil. Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil. (By Order) Senior Superintendent. Copy to:- (1) Somasekharan Nair, Thiruvathira Veedu, Kavumbhagom P.O., Kizhakkummuriyil, Thiruvalla. (2) Proprietor, Attinkara Electronics, Kurisukavala, Thiruvalla. (3) Managing Director, Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd., Power Stores Division, Pottipathiplass, 2nd Floor, 25, Numkampakkom High Road, Chennai – 600034. (4) Manager, APC India Pvt. Ltd., G.349, 10th Cross Road, Panampalli Nagar, Ernakulam, Kochi. (5) Manager, Spectra Electronics, NH-47, Madhava Junction, Harippad, Alapuzha. (6) The stock file.
| | HONORABLE LathikaBhai, Member | HONORABLE Jacob Stephen, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE N.PremKumar, Member | | 
