IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 6th day of November, 2014.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member-I)
Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member-II)
C.C.No.101/2014 (Filed on 01.08.2014)
Between:
Beena Philip,
Johns Villa,
Kodumon East,
Pathanamthitta – 691 555. …. Complainant
And:
- Manager/Proprietor,
Alankar Hyper Market,
Pathanamthitta.
Addl.2. Venus Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
Thula Bhavan,
Market Road,
Ernakulam, Cochin. …. Opposite parties
O R D E R
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member):
Complainant filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. Brief facts of the case is as follows: On 02.06.2014 complainant purchased a weighing machine from the 1st opposite party by paying Rs.2,862/- which is manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. The amount was paid through her credit card. After using one time machine become faulty. On 18.07.2014 machine was entrusted with the opposite party for repairing. On 30.07.2014 complainant approached the 1st opposite party for collecting the repaired machine. But the opposite party tried to hand over the defective weighing machine without repairing. So the complainant demanded replacement or repairing. But 1st opposite party did not turned up. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service which caused financial loss and mental agony to the complainant. Hence this complaint for getting the price o the weighing machine of Rs.2,862/- along with cost and compensation.
3. In this case, 1st opposite party entered appearance and filed their version.
4. 1st opposite party filed version with the following contentions: Opposite party denied the allegation that complainant herself purchased the machine from their shop and its complaints. When the complainant approached the opposite party on 18.07.2014, opposite party is willing to change the defective machine with the concurrence of the manufacturer. But the complainant is not amenable for the same and she left by saying that she is going to file complaint against them.
5. Moreover, 1st opposite party or the addl. 2nd opposite party has not given any warranty or guarantee to the product. According to the 1st opposite party, the complaint o the machine is occurred either due to her misuse or by weighing excess weight.
6. 1st opposite party is only a retailer and responsibility of the quality of the product is upon the manufacturer. As such, 1st opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service towards the complainant. With the above contentions, 1st opposite party prays for the dismissal of the complaint.
7. Addl. 2nd opposite party is exparte.
8. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
9. The evidence of this complaint consists of the oral deposition of PW1 and Ext.A1 to A3. After closure of evidence, complainant was heard.
10. The Point:- The complainant’s case is that she had purchased a weighing machine from the 1st opposite party but it was become faulty within a short period. Product was given to the opposite party for repair. But opposite party did not rectified the complaint or not replaced the weighing machine in spite of the complainant’s demand for the same. The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service towards the customers for which they are liable to the complainant.
11. In order to prove the case of the complainant, complainant was examined as PW1 and documents were marked as Ext.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the purchase bill of weighing machine for Rs.2,936/- dated 02.06.2014. Ext.A2 is the receipt No.1909 dated 18.07.2014 issued by the 1st opposite party to the complainant for receiving the machine. Ext.A3 is the slip of State Bank of Travancore for Rs.2,936/-.
12. On the other hand, the contentions of the 1st opposite party is that they are only retailer and they have not issued any warranty or guarantee to the machine. The damage occurred is due to its misuse and overload. Moreover, opposite party was willing to change the product with the permission of the manufacturer. But the complainant is not prepared for the same. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service from their part.
13. In order to prove the contention of the opposite party, opposite party neither produced any oral or documentary evidence or even cross-examined PW1.
14. On the basis of the materials on record, it is found that parties have no dispute with regard to the sale and purchase of the weighing machine. According to the complainant, it become faulty within a short period. But opposite parties contention is that damage caused due to misuse and overload. But no evidence adduced before us for proving the said contention by the opposite party. Moreover, the manufacturer and seller is equally liable to the consumers. Mere denial of the allegations is not sufficient for proving the case of a party. Therefore, there is no reasons to disbelieve the allegations of the complainant. Hence this complaint is allowable as we find that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service. 1st opposite party being the retailer is the intermediary between the manufacturer and the customer, it is his duty to redress the grievance of a customer at the earliest. But he willfully abstained from his primary duty.
15. In the result, this complaint is allowed thereby the 1st opposite party is directed to return the price of the machine of Rs.2,862/- (Rupees Two Thousand Eight hundred and sixty two only) along with cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) and compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the complainant within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize the whole amount ordered herein above with 10% interest from today till the realization of the whole amount. However, 1st opposite party is at liberty to realize the price of the machine from the 2nd addl. opposite party if he desires so.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 6th day of November, 2014.
(Sd/-)
K.P. Padmasree,
(Member – I)
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President) : (Sd/-)
Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member – II) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : Beena Philip
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 : Purchase bill of weighing machine for Rs.2,936/- dated 02.06.2014. A2 : Receipt No.1909 dated 18.07.2014 issued by the 1st opposite party
to the complainant.
A3 : Slip of State Bank of Travancore for Rs.2,936/-.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties: Nil.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: Nil.
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) Beena Philip, Johns Villa, Kodumon East,
Pathanamthitta – 691 555.
- Manager/Proprietor, Alankar Hyper Market,
Pathanamthitta.
(3) Venus Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Thula Bhavan,
Market Road, Ernakulam, Cochin.
(4) The Stock File.