Orissa

Rayagada

CC/39/2019

Sri Styanarayan Dash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Propritor, Sital Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Self

15 Feb 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA, 765 001

C.C. Case  No. 39 / 2019.                               Date.     15    .02   . 2020.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                                      President

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,                                                         Member.

Smt.Padmalaya  Mishra,.                                                Member

 

Sri Satyanarayana  Dash, S/O: Sri  Magata Dash, Convent  School Road, 2^nd. Lane,  Po/Dist: Rayagada (Odisha)..                                         …Complainant.

Versus.

1.The  Manager/Proprietor, M/S. Sital Enterprises, Rayagada.

2.The  Manager,  Luminous Power Technology Pvt. Ltd., C-56 Mayapuri Industrial  Area, Phase-2, New Delhi-110064 ,

3.The  Manager, Luminous Power Technology Pvt. Ltd., Corporate   office,  Plot No. 150, Sector- 44, Gurgaon, Haryana- 122003. … Opposite parties.

 

For the Complainant:- Sri P.N.Dash, Advocate.

For the O.Ps:- Set exparte.

JUDGEMENT

 

            The  factual matrix of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for non removing the defects during warranty period  towards   Luminous battery  for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

 

That the  complainant  had purchased   Luminous battery  from the O.P. No. 1 by paying cash payment of Rs.11.500.00 having  warranty  bearing   invoice No. 323   Dt.

10 10..2017.   The above set  became  defunct  after eight  months  with a  following  defects i.e. not standing the charging properly and not supply the electricity and other problems. So the complainant had handed over the same to the O.P. No.1 in turn the O.P. No.1 had  sent the same to the O.P. No.2  for rectification 2 times.  But till date the O.Ps have not rectified the defects of the  above battery. On  asking the O.Ps were taking  one or other plea. Hence this case before the forum  for redressal of  his grievance  and to  direct the O.Ps to     refund purchase price   and further direct the  OPs to pay  compensation  and also cost of  litigation to the complainant  & such other  relief as the  forum deems fit and proper  for  the interest of justice.

On being noticed  the O.Ps  neither   entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  5 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.Ps.  Observing lapses of around 1(One) years   for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  the  counsel for the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps. The action of the O.Ps are against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.Ps.  were set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

          We therefore constrained to  proceed to dispose of the case, on its merit. 

          Heard from the complainant.   We perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the complainant.

         FINDINGS.

                .

.               From the records it reveals that, the complainant has purchased  Luminous battery 12 V. battery 1500 AH  No. G7H387E151887 from the O.P. No.1 by paying cash payment of Rs.11,500.00 having   2 and half year warranty  bearing   invoice No. 323   Dt. 10.10.2017(copies of the  tax invoice is in the file which is marked as Annexure-I). But unfortunately within   the warranty period  the above  set found defective and not functioning  properly. The complainant complained the OPs  for  rectification of the above set.  Inspite of rectification the  same problem  exists. Hence  this C.C. case.   

                It is admitted position of law that when   a  goods sold  by the  manufacturer has under gone  servicing   and even such  servicing  the same defects  persist  it   is deemed  to be a  manufacturing defect.   Hence the complainant is entitled to thoroughly  check up  of the above  set   and   to  remove   the defects  of   the above set and to give  with fresh warrantee .

It is held and reported  in  CPJ 2005 (2) page No.781 the Hon’ble State  Commission , Chandigarh observed  the dealer is the person who in the market comes in direct contact with the consumer and he assures about the quality   of goods sold and in case  the consumer  had problem with the above set, the dealer was under an obligation to refer the matter  to the manufacturer for necessary  relief, which  in the  instant case was done.

Coming to the merits of the case the complainant had purchased the above set  from the O.Ps    on payment of consideration  an amount of Rs. 11,500.00 on Dt. . 10.10.2017(copies of the  retail  invoice marked as Annexure-I ).  On perusal of the record we observed  the complainant  after using  some months for rectification of defects  had intimated to the  O.Ps but could not be  rectified  by  the  O.Ps till date.

On perusal of the record we observed that  the complainant made several complaints with the O.Ps pointing out the defects  which goes on to show that  right from  the very beginning  the above set was not performing  well and continued  repeatedly to develop defects  resulting  in  non-performance which was intimated by the complainant.   Further we observed that  on repeated complaints made  by the complainant to the O.Ps neither the defects have been removed nor replaced  with a new  set.  We  hold   at this stage if the above set required frequent servicing then it can be presumed that it has a manufacturing defect. If a defective set  is supplied a consumer he  is entitled to get refund of the price of the  set or to replaced  with a new set and also the consumer concerned is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost to meet the mental agony. In the instant case as it appears that the  above  set which was purchased by the complainant which had developed  defects and the O.Ps were unable to restore its normal functioning during the warranty period.

             It appears that the complainant invested a substantial amount and purchased the above  set with an expectation to have the effective benefit of use of the above set. In this case the complainant was deprived of getting beneficial use   of the set and deprived of using the above set for such a long time and the defects were not removed by the O.Ps who could know the defects from time to time from the complainant. In the instant case the O.Ps  are  liable.

On appreciation of the evidences adduce before it, the forum is inclined to allow the complaint against the OPs.

Hence  to  meet the  ends of justice, the following order is passed.   

                                                O R D E R

In  resultant the complaint petition  stands  allowed  on exparte against the O.Ps.

The O.P  No..2 &  3 (Manufacturer)  directed to return back the defective product from the complainant  by paying the price of the  above Battery set  a sum of Rs. 11,500/- besides to pay an amount of Rs.1,500/- towards mental agony and  cost of  litigation.

The O.Ps 1   is  directed to refer the matter to the O.P No. 2 &  3  for early compliance  of the above order and co-operate the complainant for better co-ordination with the O.P.  No. 2 & 3  to provide satisfying service  for which he is entitled.

 

            The entire directions shall be carried out with in 30 days from the  date of receipt   of this order.Service the copies of the order to the parties free of cost.

 

Serve  the copies of the order to the parties as per rule free of cost.

Dictated and  corrected by me.

                Pronounced in the open forum on          15 ^th.  day of   February, 2020.

 

 

MEMBER                                                                              MEMBER                                                    PRESIDENT