Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/70/2018

K Mohan Raj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Relainace Retail Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/s C Sathish

08 Jul 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 05.02.2018

                                                                          Date of Order : 08.07.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.70/2018

DATED THIS MONDAY THE 08^TH DAY OF JULY 2019

                                 

Mr. K. Mohan Raj,

S/o. Mr. Kesavan,

New No.36, L/1320, 6^th Main Road,

Thiruvalluvar Nagar,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                         .. Complainant.                                   

 

                   ..Versus..

Reliance Retail Limited,

Rep. by its Managing Director,

No.45, Kannappan Nagar,

Muttukadu Road, (ECR),

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                    ..  Opposite party.

          

Counsel for the complainant  :  M/s. C. Sathish & another

Opposite party                        :  Exparte

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to carry out the service for the 32 inches LED Sony brand colour Television (Model No.32R 482B) under Reliance resQ care plan purchased by the complainant or to replace 32 inches Led Sony brand colour Television with a new standard quality and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and inconvenience caused to  the complainant with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he purchased a 32” Sony LED Television model No.32R 482B on 06.02.2015 for a sum of Rs.36,900/- from the opposite party with 1 year warranty and  res Q care plan benefits a on payment of Rs.3,667/-.   The complainant submits that he paid the sale price by way of EMI.  There is no dues towards the EMI.  The complainant submits that during the 1^st week of July 2016, the power light of the Sony LED TV is not functioning and found dead.  Immediately, the complainant registered a complaint to the opposite party who has taken the Sony LED TV for repair it was taken for repair on the first week of July 2016.  The technicians of the opposite party returned the Sony LED TV only in the month of November 2016 without proper repair.  Since, the Sony LED TV power light has frequently given troubles.  Hence, the complainant lodged another complaint on 15.03.2017 to the opposite party.  The technicians of the opposite party attended the complaint by merely taking photos and informed the complainant that the problem will be rectified within 3 weeks.  Inspite of making numerous complaints, the opposite party’s technicians has not repaired the Sony LED TV.  Hence, the complainant issued legal notice dated:17.10.2017 to the opposite party.   But the opposite party has not settled the demands of the complainant.   The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.     In spite of receipt of notice, the opposite party has not been appeared before this Forum and hence, the opposite party was set exparte.

3.     Though the opposite party remained Exparte, this Forum is to dispose this compliant fully on merits with available materials before this Forum. 

4.     In such circumstances, in order to prove the allegations made in the complaint the proof affidavit is filed by the complainant as his evidence, and also documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 are marked.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the opposite party is liable to carry out the service of the 32” inches LED Sony Colour Television (Model No.32R 482B) or alternatively, to replace the said 32” inches Sony Brand LED Colour TV with a new standard quality as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

The opposite party after due service of notice, not appeared before this Forum.   Hence, the opposite party was set exparte.  The complainant filed his proof affidavit, documents and written arguments.  Heard the complainant’s  Counsel also.  The learned Counsel for the complainant would contend that the complainant purchased a 32” Sony LED Television model No.32R 482B on 06.02.2015 for a sum of Rs.36,900/- from the opposite party with 1 year warranty and  res Q care plan benefits as per Ex.A2 on payment of Rs.3,667/-.   Ex.A1 is the copy of bill.  Ex.A2 is the brochure showing terms and conditions.  Further the contention of the complainant is that he paid the sale price by way of EMI.  There is no dues towards the EMI. But the complainant has not produced any loan or EMI details.  Further the contention of the complainant is that during the 1^st week of July 2016, the power light of the Sony LED TV is not functioning and found dead.  Immediately, the complainant registered a complaint to the opposite party who has taken the Sony LED TV for repair.  The technicians of the opposite party returned the Sony LED TV only in the month of November 2016 without proper repair.   Since, the Sony LED TV power light has frequently given troubles, the complainant lodged another complaint on 15.03.2017 to the opposite party.  The technicians of the opposite party attended the complaint by merely taking photos and informed the complainant that the problem will be rectified within 3 weeks.  Inspite of making numerous complaints, the opposite party’s technicians has not repaired the Sony LED TV.  Hence, the complainant is constrained to issue legal notice dated:17.10.2017 as per Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 is the copy of acknowledgement card.  The opposite party has not sent any reply.  The opposite party also has not come forward to rectify the defects in the Sony LED Television.  Hence, the complainant is constrained to file this case.  The opposite party remained exparte proves the deficiency in service. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall rectify the defects in the complaint mentioned TV within one month, failing which, the opposite party shall replace the 32 inches Sony LED TV with a new standard quality with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party is directed to rectify the defects in the complaint mentioned TV within one month, failing which, the opposite party shall replace the 32 inches LED Sony TV with a ‘new standard quality’ and cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant.  

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 08^th day of July 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	06.02.2015	Copy of purchasing bill issued by the opposite party to complainant for purchasing the television
Ex.A2	06.02.2015	Copy of Reliance Q Care Plan book (Serial No.175443) – Reliance res Q Digital service centre issued by the opposite party to complainant
Ex.A3	17.10.2017	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant to opposite party
Ex.A4	21.10.2017	Copy of acknowledgement card

 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT