BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 20/09/2011
Date of Order : 03/11/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 500/2011
Between
Bahuleyan. V.V., | :: | Complainant |
S/o. Kochuvelu, Edathikochira House, Janatha Road, Panangad. P.O., Kochi -682 506. |
| (By party-in-person) |
And
RP Telebuy Sky Shop Pvt. Ltd., | :: | Opposite party |
No. 44/1136, C18, C19, 1st Floor, Chammany Towers, No. 89/1, Kaloor Junction, Ernakulam – 682 017. |
| (Absent) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
On 25-06-2010, the complainant purchased an Abcircle Pro from the opposite party at a price of Rs. 9,995/- with one year warranty. But during the warranty period, the machine became defunct. In spite of repeated requests, the opposite party failed to respond or rectify the defects of the machine. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite party to refund the price of the machine. Hence this complaint.
2. In spite of service of notice from this Forum, the opposite party chose to remain absent during proceedings for their own reasons. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A4 were marked on his side. Heard the complainant, who appeared in person.
3. The only point that came up for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the Abcircle under dispute?
4. Ext. A1 retail invoice goes to show that on 25-06-2011, the complainant purchased the Abcircle from the opposite party at a price of Rs. 9,995/-. The opposite party was offered warranty of one year. According to the complainant subsequent to the purchase the machine became mal-functioning and he intimated the matter to the opposite party. Ext. A2 the letter dated 07-03-2011 issued by the complainant to the opposite party and the telephone records (Ext. A4) go to show that the complainant had repeatedly intimated the opposite party to redress his grievances in which the opposite party failed. The above conduct of the opposite party not only amounts to deficiency in service, but also unfair trade practice which is squarely unpardonable so far as a consumer is concerned in common law a non-resiprication of a legal mandate is admission of guilt. In the above circumstances, we are only to hold that the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the machine from the opposite party.
5. In the result, we allow the complaint and direct that the opposite party shall refund Rs. 9,995/- with 12% p.a. from 25-06-2010 till realisation, in that event the complainant shall return the defective Abcircle to the opposite party simultaneously. The opposite party shall take possession of the same at his own cost of transportation
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 3rd day of November 2011.
Sd/- A. Rajesh,President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of retail invoice dt. 25-06-2010 |
“ A2 | :: | Copy of the letter dt. 07-03-2011 |
“ A3 | :: | Acknowledgment card |
“ A4 | :: | Computer print of call details |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
