DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

                                                                 CONSUMER  COMPLAINT  CASE NO. 51 OF 2017

Gouranga Panda ( 55 Years),

S/O: Late Shib Narayan Panda,

R/O: VSS Nagar, Bundia Colony Qr.No.18/B, PO: R.Kudopali,

PS: Brajrajnagar, Dist-Jharsuguda, Odisha,……………….……..………. Complainant.

                                           Versus 

1. Proprietor, M/s Manoranjan,

At: Main Road, Brajrajnagar,

PO/PS: Brajrajnagar, Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha.

2. Manager, O.P.Technologies Rourkela,

L-45, Phase-2 Basanti Colony Rourkela,

Dist: Sundargarh, Odisha.

3. Toshiba India Private Limited,

Corporate Office, 3^rd Floor, Building No. 10,

DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon- 122 002……….………..................... Opp. Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                               Sri P.N.Tiwary, Adv.& Associates.

For the Opp. Party No.1                                         Sri T.K.Singh,Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Party No.2                                        Sri B.K.Swain, Adv. & Associates.

Foir the Opp. Party No.3                                       Sri A.K.Mishra,Adv. & Associates.

Order dated-05.09.2017.

Present:- Shri Sundarlal Behera, President, Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, Member, Smt. Anamika Nanda, Member(W).

Shri Sundarlal Behera, President : - The complainant purchased one Toshiba LCD TV by paying Rs.22,900/- only on dtd. 19.05.2012 from the O.P.No.1. The said TV set started occurring problem about which the complainant informed to the O.Ps. and brought the said TV to the O.P.No.2. The O.P.No.2 suggested to purchase one new TV on payment of Rs.18,500/- only by giving the old TV to the O.P.No.2 for the cost of Rs.20,000/- only.  The complainant paid Rs.18,500/- only and purchased one new TV whose warranty period was from 15.10.2015 to 14.10.2018. The said new TV

also was not functioning properly about which the complainant send message on dtd.04.03.2017 to the customer Care but till date there is no action by the O.Ps, hence this case.

Being noticed through this Forum, the O.Ps appeared before this Forum Submitted their written statement  except O.P.No.2. The O.P.No.1 submitted that the complainant has no any allegation against the O.P.No.1.  The O.P.No.2 fail to file his written version.  The O.P.No.3 submitted that the complainant purchased Toshiba LED TV by paying Rs.18,000/- only on dtd. 15.10.2015 from the O.P.No.1 and paid Rs.500/- only for extension of two years warranty.  The complainant made complaint on 07.03.2017 and after inspection it was found that the penal required to be replaced which was unavailable in the stock and required 45 to 60 days.  After reaching of the said penal the complainant was informed but he refused.  The O.Ps. denied any deficiency in service and prayed the case should be dismissed.

Heard from both the parties and perused the case record including materials available. The complainant had purchased one Toshiba LED TV by paying Rs.22,900/- only on dtd. 19.05.2012 from the O.P.No.1. The said T.V started occurring problems against which the complainant purchased another TV by paying Rs.18,000/- only by replacing the old TV from the O.P.No.2 which was having one year of warranty and also paid Rs.500/- for extension of two years warranty on dtd.15.10.2015.  Within the period of warranty the said TV again started problem.  The complainant informed to the O.Ps. from where after investigating it was found that the penal of the said TV was to be replaced but that was not available with O.P.No.2 .  The O.P.No.2 took time for 45 to 60 days. 

However the complainant put in trouble due to unavailability of spare parts, on the other hand the O.P bind its hands due to the said unavailability of spare parts. The complainant is eligible to get repaired or to get replaced of his defected LED TV within the period of warranty, hence we allow the complaint case with directions to the O.P.No.3 to replace the said defected LED TV of complainant and give one defect freer new LED TV of the same brand or pay the price of said TV in exchange of defective TV. The O.P.No.3 is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only to the complainant towards mental agony and litigation costs within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.  

Accordingly the present case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today on this the 05^th day of September’ 2017. Free copy of this order shall be communicated to the parties as per Rule.

I Agree.                                             I Agree.                                                                        

A.Nanda, Member(W)                  S.K.Ojha, Member                  S. L. Behera, President                                 

Dictated and corrected by me,

                                         S. L. Behera, President