Orissa

Cuttak

CC/122/2022

Mrs Alfalin Routray - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance Digital - Opp.Party(s)

self

30 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.122/2022

 

Mrs. AlfalinRoutray,

W/O: Sri Debashish Barick,

At/PO:Kalyaninagar,P.S:Madhupatna,

Dist:Cuttack, Pin-753013,Cuttack.                             ... Complainant.

 

                                                                Vrs.

         Reliance Digital, At: Unit No.24, Plot No.967,

         JobraRoad,Near Bombay Hotel,

         P.S:Malgodown,P.O:College Square,

         Dist:Cuttack,Pin-753003.                                                ... Opp. Party.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                                Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

               Date of filing:     24.06.2022

Date of Order:    26.12.2022

 

For the complainant:          Self.

For the O.P.   :        None.

 

Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.                                                                   

Case of the complainant in short is that she had purchased one Samsung LED T.V model no.43” Q60Ton 10.8.21 on payment of Rs.45,711/- from the O.P who is the authorised shop of Samsung T.V.  The Samsung Company had given one-year overall warranty on the T.V and two-years warranty on the panel board.  The further case of the complainant is that the said LED T.V could not be installed in her house immediately as some family members were detected Covid positive by that time.  However, on a later datethe technical person of the O.P came for installation of the said T.V in her house but while opening the seal cover of T.V, it was found that there is a scratch in the panel board of said T.V.  Due to such defect, the said T.V could not be installed.  The complainant as well as the technical person intimated the O.P about the defect in the T.V and replacement of that panel board.   But the O.P did not turn-up.  The complainant’srepeated approach to O.P also did not yield any result.   The O.P although had assured for replacement of the panel board of T.V, , but till filing of this case he had not replaced the panel board.  Hence, the complainant has filed the present case with a prayer for a direction to O.P to refund the cost of the T.V. of Rs.45,711/- and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards the compensation for harassment and mental agony as well as other genuine reliefs.

The complainant has filed certain documents in order to prove his case.

2.         Though notice was issued to the O.P but he did not appear for which he  was set exparte.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

            i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and whether they had practised any unfair trade?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed?

Point no.i&ii.

For the sake of convenience point no.i& ii are  taken up together  first for consideration here in this case.

On perusal of the documents, as available in the case record it is, it is noticed that the complainant had purchased one Samsung LED T.V model No.43” Q 60 T on 10.8.21 on payment of Rs.45,711/- from the O.P.  During installation of the said T.V it was noticed that there was a scratch in the panel board which was reported to the O.P by the technical person of the O.P as well as by the complainant.   Thereafter, the complainant approached many times for replacement of panel board and installation of her new T.V in her house but the O.P did not replace the scratched panel board of T.V.  Hence, the O.P has committed deficiency in

service as well as unfair trade practice and he is liable and the case of the complainant is maintainable.  Accordingly, these two issues are answered in favour of the complainant. 

 

Issue no.iii.

From the above discussions, it can well be said here that the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as claimed by her.  Hence it is so ordered.

                                    ORDER

            The case is allowed exparte against the O.P.  The O.P is directed to refund Rs.45,711/-, the cost of the LED T.V alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from 10.8.2021 till the payment is made.  The O.P is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and harassment and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of his litigation to the complainant.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 26^th day of December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                                                                                                                                                                                   

                                                                                                                                                         Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                                Member

 

                                                                                                                                     Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President