ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER. This complaint filed by the complainant for getting compensation of Rs.15,000/- The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: On5.10.2005 the complainant along with one Mr. Saju, Electrical Contractor, went to the Jose Electrical, for purchasing items such as switches, Boards and other Auxiliary items to be fitted in his newly constructed house. When the contractor Saju had demanded items manufactured by the M>K. Electric India Ltd, on behalf of the complainant, the opp.party offered and insisted for purchasing the products manufactured by One Clipsal Company stating that they are of high quality and last for a longer duration and never get damaged and they get fitted nicely and properly in Anchor Roma Boxes. The opp.party also assured that in case of any damages take place, the switches and frames shall be replaced free of cost at their expense. The opp.party furnished necessary bill for the items purchased. When the switches fixed on the boards, two of them got damaged on the first day itself. The complainant reported the matter, the opp.party gave replacements of the two switches without any hesitation. But to the great disappointment of the complainant, most of the frames got broken at the places where screws were fixed while plugs were fitted and removed from the respective sockets. As a result the wires remained exposed and separated from the boxes Moreover after a few days it is so happened that all the grid frames replaced newly also got separated from the boxes. The opp.party was informed of this they were total indifferent in their reply and refused to do anything to the utmost disappointment of the complainant. In the above circumstances the complainant sent a demand notice to the opp.party dated 27.10.2007 The opp.party sent a reply dt. 12.11.07 to the complainant showing his ignorance and indifference. Thereafter a representative of the opp.party visited the complainant’s house and assured of the replacement of all the switch boards free of cost. Therefore the complainant approached this Forum for relief. Hence the complaint.. The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts Opp.party advised the complainant that the clipsal switches and Board must be fitted only in clipsal Box. But the complainant voluntarily purchased clipsal electrical items. When the switches fixed on the boards got damaged, the opp.party replaced all the damaged items on free of cost. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opp.party and prays for the dismissal of the complaint. Points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party 2. Reliefs and costs. For the complainant PW.1 and 2 are examined. Ext. P1 to P6 are marked. For the opp.party DW.1 is examined. POINTS: Here there is no dispute that the complainant purchased switches and Board manufactured by clipsal company from the opp.party. The question to be decided is that whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the side of the opp.party. Opp.party admits that after fittings within the warranty period most of the switches boards were got damaged. According to the complainant he was insisted by the opp.party for purchasing the items of clipsal company as mentioned in Ext.P1. Opp.party denied the said contention and contented that the complainant voluntarily purchased Ext.P1 items neglecting the advice of opp.party. For both of the versions there is no evidence. Anyway the damages to the switch board were occurred in the warranty period. From Ext.P2 series and Ext.P6 it is revealed that most of the switch boards were got damaged and the defects appeared more than once. That is nothing but the gross deficiency in service on the side of opp.party by supplying materials of poor quality. Hence the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the opp.party. In the result the complaint is allowed. The opp.party is directed to pay Rs.15,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the supply of cheap quality items. No cost ordered. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009. I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant: PW.1. – Sanal Kumar PW.2. - Saju S.D List of documents for the complainant P1. – Bills P2. –Photo and CD P3. – Copy of notice.
P4. – Acknowledgement card P5. – Reply notice from opp.party P6. – Expert report List of witnesses for the opp.party DW.1. – K.J. Joseph List of documents for the opp.party: NIL | 
