Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Presiding Member
1. Ravinder Singh, complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainant purchased one printer Model No. Ricoh SP111 (M178-29) on 10.9.2016 vide Invoice No. SOF965/16-17/328 of Rs. 3279/- by placing online order on website www.snapdeal.com on 10.9.2016 and the same was received through courier on 15.9.2016. The said printer was having one year warranty from the date of its purchase. The printer stopped working on 23.1.2017. In this regard complainant wrote to the opposite party through e-mail dated 3.2.2017, but the opposite party did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The opposite party vide e-mail dated 4.2.2017 asked serial number of printer and complete postal address of complainant, which the complainant provided through e-mail dated 7.2.2017 to the opposite party. The opposite party vide e-mail dated 7.2.2017 issued service request number LPS246366 and assured “service engineer will contact shortly”. But till date complainant did not get any response. Thereafter the complainant sent reminder through e-mail dated 15.2.2017 which was replied by the opposite party vide e-mail dated 16.2.2017 again told that “your machine has been registered under warranty and complaint id is LPS249195 and assigned to engineer , they will be contacting shortly”. But however till date the opposite party failed to repair the printer . The complainant vide instant complaint has sought for the following reliefs:-
(a) Opposite party be directed to immediately repair the printer of the complainant ;
(b) Compensation to the tune of Rs. 25000/- alongwith litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 7500/- may also be awarded to the complainant.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Opposite party did not put in appearance despite service of notice, as such it was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
3. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into ex-parte evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 & Ex.C-2, copy of retail invoice Ex.C-3, copies of e-mails Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-9 and closed his evidence.
4. We have heard the complainant and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
5. The complainant has filed an affidavit Ex.C-2 stating that opposite party repaired the printer on 8.4.2017 i.e. during the pendency of the present complaint. As such the grievance of the complainant has been redressed. But, however, complainant presses for cost and compensation as claimed vide instant complaint. In our considered opinion, complainant is entitled for compensation as well as litigation expenses because opposite party made the complainant to file the instant complaint and his grievance has been redressed during the pendency of the complaint. When the grievance of the complainant were not met with, he had also suffered mental pain, harassment & inconvenience as well. However, complainant has made a request for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 25000/- vide instant complaint which in our opinion appear to be quite exorbitant and excessive. It is settled principle of law that compensation has to be granted in order to set off the loss occasioned by the complainant and no exorbitant or excessive compensation is to be granted to enrich a party at the cost of the other . In our considered opinion the grievance of the complainant shall be fully met with if he is granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 2000/- and we grant the same accordingly. Litigation expenses are assessed at Rs. 1000/-. Opposite party is directed to make compliance of the order within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order ; failing which, awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint until full and final recovery. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated: 10.5.2017
(
