DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT : Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB : PRESIDENT
Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) : MEMBER
Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER
Thursday the 17th day of August 2023
C.C.328/2022
Complainant
Vineetha R Kottai
‘Vineetha Bhavan’
Pathirippatta-P.O,
Pin – 673 507.
Opposite Parties
- Mr.Rimil.V.K
Everon Power Products,
Wayanad Road, Kuttyadi,
Pin – 673 508.
- Mr.Appu
Everon Power Products,
Wayanad Road, Kuttyadi,
Pin – 673 508.
ORDER
By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
In the year 2022, the complainant thought of extending the CCTV installed in her house to her land and private road. On 18-02-2022 she instructed her electrician Sri. Rajeevan to arrange somebody for the work. Within two hours, the opposite parties reached her house and the complainant showed them the places she wanted to see in the CCTV. The complainant had made it clear that there would be no compromise on the quality and the bill and that repair work should be quick and prompt. The opposite parties agreed and offered excellent quality products which would be purchased from Kozhikode. The complainant wanted a new TV also. Then the first opposite party suggested G connect TV from myG, Kozhikode.
The CCTV was installed on 20-02-2022 and the complainant paid Rs.20,000/- on 18-02-2022 and Rs.46,000/- on 23-02-2022 to the opposite parties, total being Rs.66,000/-. But they did not give any bill as agreed.
But the CCTV was not functioning well and the installation and positioning were also wrong. The complainant could not see the places which she had asked the opposite parties to be seen. The G connect TV was having blurred vision. When the second opposite party and the technician came, she explained her sad plight and insisted for bill. But the bill produced was of ‘Everon Power Products’. Later the second opposite party gave the guarantee card of G connect TV, but no bill was given.
5. The TV soon became unclear and dim and completely stopped functioning on 17-03-2022. The opposite parties did not respond to her voice messages. So she had to contact Sri. Rajeevan again to get it repaired on 27-04-2022. After that, when she tried to save the incidents from her land, she could not do so. She came to know that the opposite parties had replaced the hard disk which was of 30 days memory to that of 15 days. The opposite parties did not take any positive steps to address her concerns even after repeated requests and issuance of registered letter. In the meanwhile, she managed to get a bill of G connect TV from myG Corporate office, Kozhikode. The bill was in the name of first opposite party. The CCTV and other fittings are of low quality, though the charge was high. On 17-10-2022 the complainant issued a registered notice to the first opposite party calling up on him to pay the money back or repair everything and change the hard disk to 30 days memory. Though she had spent Rs.66,000/- for installing the CCTV, it was not useful to her. The opposite parties, taking advantage of her ignorance in technical knowledge with regard to TV, CCTV etc, have deceived her. They remained passive to her genuine complaints. Hence the complaint to direct the opposite parties to return Rs.66,000/- paid by her after taking back the installations and to compensate her for the unfair trade practice and deficiency of service due to which she had to undergo mental torture and agony.
The opposite parties were set ex-parte.
7. The points that arise for determination in this complaint are:
- Whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, as alleged?
- Reliefs and costs.
The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts A1 to A11 were marked.
9. Heard.
10. Point No.1–The complainant is alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. She is seeking refund of the money paid to the opposite parties for installation of the CCTV, along with compensation for the mental agony and harassment caused to her.
11. PW1 has filed proof affidavit in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. Ext A1 is the screen shot of Gpay transactions, Ext A2 is the estimate dated 19-02-2022, Ext A3 is the warranty card, Ext A4 is the screen shot, Ext A5 is the copy of the letter dated 10-09-2022, Ext A6 is the copy of the letter dated 21-09-2022, Ext A7 is the copy of the letter dated 10-10-2022, Ext A8 is the copy of the tax invoice dated 18-02-2022, Ext A9 is the screen shot, Ext A10 is the copy of the letter dated 17-10-2022 and Ext A11 is the photocopy of unclaimed postal article.
12.The evidence of PW1 stands unchallenged. The opposite parties have not turned up to file version. They have not produced any evidence to disprove the averments in the complaint or to rebut the veracity of the documents produced and marked on the side of the complainant. There is no contra evidence to disprove the claim of the complainant. The case of the complainant stands proved through the testimony of PW1 and Ext A1 to Ext A11. Deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties are established and proved.The opposite parties are bound to refund Rs.66,000/- to the complainant after taking back the defective CCTV and the connected accessories. Undoubtedly, the complainant, who is a senior citizen and a widow, was put to intense mental agony and hardship due to the deficient service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, for which, she is entitled to be compensated adequately. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 5,000/- will be reasonable compensation in this case. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable.
13. Point No.2 :In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows:
- CC 328/2022 is allowed.
- The opposite parties are hereby directed to refund of Rs.66,000/- (Rupees sixty six thousand only) to the complainant. On such payment the opposite parties can take back the CCTV and the connected accessories installed by them in the premises of the complainant.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
- The payment as aforestated shall be made within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs.66,000/- shall carry an interest of 6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
- No order as to costs.
Pronounced in open Commission on this the 17th day of August 2023.
Date of Filing: 28-11-2022.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext A1 - Screen shot of Gpay transactions.
Ext A2 - Estimate dated 19-02-2022.
Ext A3 - Warranty card.
Ext A4 - Screen shot.
Ext A5 - Copy of the letter dated 10-09-2022.
Ext A6 - Copy of the letter dated 21-09-2022.
Ext A7 - Copy of the letter dated 10-10-2022.
Ext A8 - Copy of the tax invoice dated 18-02-2022.
Ext A9 - Screen shot.
Ext A10 - Copy of the letter dated 17-10-2022.
Ext A11 - Photocopy of unclaimed postal article.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Nil.
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 -Vineetha R Kottai (Complainant)
Witnesses for the opposite parties
Nil.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
True copy,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar.
