Date of filing : 30-04-2014
Date of order : 29-09-2014
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.85/2014
Dated this, the 29th day of September 2014
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
Rajalakshmi.M, Kousthubham, : Complainant
Alangod Housing Colony, Mannipadi,
Shivanagar, RD Nagar.Po,
Kasaragod.671124
(In person)
1 Proprietor, Land mark-Y-MASS ELECTRONICS, : Opposite parties
Century Park Building, New Bus Stand, Kasaragod
2 Hykon India (P) Ltd, Hykon House,
Nr. Malayala Manorama,
Ikkanda Warrier Road, Thrissur.1
(Ops 1 & 2 Exparte)
O R D E R
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL, MEMBER
The gist of the complainant’s case is that on 27-10-2012 she purchased an inverter of M/s.Hykon India Pvt. Ltd from opposite party No.1. Right from the beginning the inverter unit was not properly working was warranted by the manufacturer due to manufacturing defects. The major parts of the inverter was periodically replaced and registered a complaint through opposite party No.1 and the complainant even directly went to opposite party No.2’s office at Trissur and eventhough opposite party No.2 agreed to replace the same, they refused to do so and hence the complaint.
2. On receipt of notice, opposite party No.1 remained absent and opposite party No.2 appeared through counsel, but subsequently not filed any version and both the names were called and set exparte. Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts A1 to A3 were marked.
3. On perusal of the document and the evidence of PW1, her case of manufacturing defects of the inverter is proved on the basis of Ext.A2 series 7 in numbers are more than sufficient for us to reach in to specific conclusion of defects of the inverter. It is highly pertinent to note that on the basis of Ext.A1 bill shows that inverter was purchased on 27-10-2012. But the inverter got damaged within one month itself. That is the first service of the inverter was on 16-11-2012 itself and moreover almost all the major parts of the inverter was replaced but still it is faulty. Eventhough opposite party No.2 promised to replace it, now prolonging the same on one pretext or another. From the above evidence it is a clear case of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties. Hence the complainant is entitled for compensation for her mental agony.
4. Absolutely no explanation forthcoming from the side of opposite parties against the grievance submitted by the complainant.
In the result, the opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to install a new inverter to the complainant after taking back the defective one and further directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.3000/- as cost of the proceedings. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. 27-10-2012 Bill issued by Lan Mark Y-Maas Electronics to complainant for an amount of Rs.19400/-
A2.Series Call/Estimation/Installation Reports.
A3.Warranty card
PW1. Rajalakshmi.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
