Uttar Pradesh

Shamli

CC/110/2017

SATISH KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SACHIN RUHELA - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jun 2018

ORDER

 

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Shamli
Case Number 110/2017

Satish Kumar S/O Mr. Dharampal, resident of Aryapuri, Shamli.
                           
Vs
Sachin Ruhla S/o Sailchchand Ruhla, Mau Rambhala, Mukesh Kumar Gautam Notary Advocate street opposite the street, Shamli. Office Address - Shreeji Enterprises, Subhash Check, Done Flat Alley, Mandi Jahaharaj Gate, Top Shop in New Market, Shamli.

Opposition

Present - S. K. S. Yadav,
President, District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Shamli.
Shravan Kumar, Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shamli.
By quoting - S. K. S. Yadav,
President, District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Shamli.

Dated-08/06/2018

                                                                                                       Decision
On behalf of Savitri Satish Kumar S/o Swatshri Sri Dharmapal, Resident Aiyarpuri, Shamli presented this issue to be given in the form of financial, physical and mental indemnity against the opposition, Rs. 90,000 / - and Rs. 10,000 / - as legal expense incurred. has gone.
                          The affidavit's statement is summarized in such a way that the observer took the Polar Company, an RO Water Purifier, on 08-6-17, which the opposition had given under the offer and gave it one year guarantee and said if anything If the deficit arises, the opposition will fix it or the new RO will. Two months later, RO got spoiled and started giving dirty water, due to which the investigator and his family members got stomach upset. When it complained to the distributor, he refused to fix or change it. When the investigator asked for the bill, he also refused to bills and was shown as a transaction paper on a simple paper. When the families of the Complainants got sick after drinking water and their infection was infected. Then he went to the doctor, then the doctor told that there is a problem in water, which is why your family is sick. By which the complainants had mental, financial and physical damage. The observer complained to the opposition regarding the RO, but neither opposition nor reform was made by the opposition. Thus, by the opposition, the financier was misquoted by the substandard goods sold and the service was reduced. Therefore, in prayer, praying for Rs.90000 / - expenditure of Rs 10,000 / - total Rs.1,00,000 / - for mental, financial and physical damage in the gratification offered by the complainant.
There is no advocate for the debate on behalf of the opposition. After hearing the debate on the behalf of the complainant and observed the evidence and records available on the letter.
Observe the evidence and records available on a bird's inexhaustible letter of the investigator.
The affidavit affidavit 4C, 2 papers from list 5C, 8 C / 2 hospital bill, Oblivion with the affidavit 10C / 1, Report of Dr. 10C/ 2 and 10C / 3, and Photos of R.O. 10 C / 4 to 10 C / 8. Because there is no statement of the Opposition against the filed, the complainant statement is proved on the basis of the affidavit. By which the opposition's negligence and lack of service are established. By which it establishes that the opposition does not give the attorney receipt of the cost of the RO filter sold by the opposition and the warranty card of the purchasing material, and reduces service in the service by the opposition. Because of this negligence of the opposition, the investigator and his family members had to be admitted to the hospital because of the stomach disorders, due to drinking contaminated water due to bad R.O., which was confirmed by the affidavit 10 C / 1 reports of 10 / 2 and 10 c / 3. Due to the drinking of bad water, the respondent has proved the mental and financial loss due to the obscenity, which the occupant is entitled to get from the opposition.
                    Hence the libel of the complainants is acceptable. In this situation, the solicitor general is entitled to receive compensation or other money in mental compensation. A demand of Rs. 90,000 / - Rs. 10,000 / - Total Rs. 1,00,000 / - was sought for mental, financial and physical damage in the satisfaction promised by the conservator. In addition to Rs. 42,500 / - in medical expenditure, the exponent has shown Rs. 5,000 / - in mental damage and Rs. 5,000 in physical damage and Rs. 5,000 / - in case of dispute. The above dues amounting to Rs 57,500 / - will be equitable to the extent of 8% interest from date 15.10.2017 till the date of payment.
                            Therefore, the complaint of the complainants is acceptable to be a One sided against the opposition.
                                                                                                 Order
The complaint of the complainants is accepted from a One sided against the opposition. Rs. 42,500 / - in case of economic losses, Rs. 5,000 / - in mental indemnity, Rs. 5,000 / - in physical damage and Rs. 5000 / - in case of dispute, Total Rs. 57,500 / - (Ffity Seven thousand five hundred rupees only) with  8% interest from date 15.10.2017 till the date of payment from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shamli, in 30 days of this order. In case of default in depositing the amount payable by the opposition, ordinary interest will be payable upto 12% additional amount till the date of payment of all the dues after 30 days from the date of the order, in addition to the penal extra interest payable. After the liberation period, there will be an office filed.

 
Shravan Kumar,             SK S Yadav,
Member,                         President,