Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/10/119

K.R.Chandra Bosz - Complainant(s)

Versus

Proprietor, M.1.S. General Electro Components - Opp.Party(s)

31 Dec 2010

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/10/119
 
1. K.R.Chandra Bosz
S/o.Ravindran Nair, Karakkattu House, Manadukkam.Po. Chengala.Po.
Kasaragod
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Proprietor, M.1.S. General Electro Components
Main Road, Payyanur
Kannur
Kasaragod
2. M.1.S. Ashwini Electronics
IOnida Customer Relation Centre, Near Kurumba Temple, Kandoth Payynur
Kannur
Kerala
3. Onida Service Centre, Nayaks Road
Kasaragod
Kasaragod
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

D.o.F:19/05/2009

D.o.O:31/12/2010

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                             CC.NO. 119/10

                     Dated this, the 31st  day of December 2010

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                  : MEMBER

 

K.R.Chandrabose,

S/o Raveendran,

Karakkat House, Manadukkam Po,                                  : Complainants

Chengala, Kasaragod.

(in person)

1. Proprietor, M/S General Electro Components,

    Main Road,Payyanur,Kannur Dt.

2. M/s Ashwan Electronics,

   Onida Customer Relation Centre,

  Kandoth Ara, Near Kurumba Temple,                                : Opposite  Parties

Kandoth Po, Kannur.

(Adv.K.Shrikanta Shetty)

3. Onida Service Centre, Nayaks Road,Kasaragod.

(Exparte)

 

 

ORDER

 

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ        : PRESIDENT

 

 

       In nutshell the case of complainant is that during the extended warranty period his Onida T.V  became defective and on intimating the same opposite parties failed to repair it.  Hence he constrained to repair it from another service center by spending ` 1500/- .  Due to the dereliction and  deficiency in their services, complainant could not watch the TV programme for 42 days .  Hence the complaint claiming compensation.

 

2.     Ist & 2nd Opposite parties  appeared and filed their version.  Though notice is served on 3rd opposite party, they remained absent .  Hence 3rd opposite party is set exparte.

 

3.   Complainant examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A4 marked.  During evidence complainant submitted that it was 3rd opposite party who offered to repair the TV within 3 days and later they refused to repair the TV and hence he is claiming the compensation from 3rd opposite party only.

4.   In view of the evidence of the complainant we pass the following order.

       Complainant is allowed and 3rd opposite party  is directed to pay a sum of ` 1500/- that the complain ant spent for repairing his TV together with a compensation of `1500/- and cost of  `1000/-.  Time for compliance is limited to  30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.  Failing which ` 3000/- will carry interest @9% from the date of complaint till payment.

 

Exts:

A1-cash memorandum

A2-&A3-registered lawyer notice

A4-cash receipt

PW1-Chandrabose-complainant

Sd/                                                                                                   Sd/

MEMBER                                                                                     PRESIDENT

eva

 

 

/Forwarded by Order/

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

 

 

 

 

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.