Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/180/2014

Thilagavathi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sakthi Tronics - Opp.Party(s)

R.Hariharan

27 Oct 2015

ORDER

                                                                          Date of Complaint  : 28.03.2014

                                                                 Date of Order           :27.10.2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT :    THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L.,                  :  PRESIDENT                     

                     TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                :  MEMBER – I

                     DR.T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

                                                     

C.C.No. 180 / 2014

THIS  TUESDAY  27^th  DAY OF  OCOTBER 2015

 

Thilagavathi,

D/o. V.Balachandran,

No.11/6, Pachaiyappan Street,

Ellias Road,

Chennai 600 002.                                         .. Complainant.                                        

- Vs- Sakthi Tronics, Rep. by its Owner, Thanigachalam, No.213/A, Bharathi Salai (Opp. Amir Mahal), Royapettah, Chennai 600 014.                                            .. Opposite party.		.. Opposite party.

 

For the complainant                     :   M/s. R.Hariharan & another     

For the opposite party                  :   Exparte   

 

           Complaint under section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,02,100/- towards the cost of the Dish T.V. Product and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.  

ORDER

THIRUMATHI K.AMALA,   ::    MEMBER-I

Even after receipt of the notice, the opposite party did not file written version.  Hence, the opposite party was set exparte.    The complainant filed proof affidavit.  Exhibits A1 to A3 were marked on the side of the complainant.  

2.     Perused the complaint, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3  filed by the complainant  and proof affidavit and the entire C.C. records and considered the arguments of the complainant.     

3.     On perusal of records it reveals that the complainant had purchased a Dish T.V. product from the opposite party on 1.11.2013 for a sum of Rs.2100/- Ex.A3 proves the same.    As per the contention of the complainant the said product failed to work properly from the date of connection.   When she made complaint to the opposite party several times in person regarding the problem occurred they failed to heed to her.   Hence on compliant to Toll free No. a service man from the dish T.V. company came and conveyed that the product is an old one and already used one and cannot be serviced.   Hence she caused legal notice to the opposite party to return the cost of the product which was received by the opposite party but they failed to send any reply nor returned the said amount.  Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 proves the same.  

4.     It appears that the opposite party is the agent of Dish T.V. company.   Since the product purchased from the opposite party was not working the subscription was not paid and the Dish T.V connection was cancelled.   As such the purpose of installation of Dish T.V. was not fulfilled.    It is only due to defective product of the opposite party.

5.     After receiving the money from the customer it is the duty of the opposite party to attend to the complaint if any and rectify the defect.  But here the opposite party failed to do so  and also failed to send any reply to the legal notice even after receipt of the same nor repaid the cost of the product.  As such the opposite party had committed deficiency of service as well as caused mental agony to the complainant.    Hence the recovery of the cost of the Dish T.V. product from the opposite party by the complainant is justifiable.    Whereas the compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant and she is entitled only for a reasonable compensation.

6.     Moreover the opposite party also failed to appear before this Hon'ble forum to defend  the case.

7.     From the above facts and circumstances of the case we are of the considered view that the opposite party is liable to return the cost of the Dish T.V. product  of Rs.2100/- on taking the invoice mentioned product from the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as compensation towards mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- towards litigation charges to the complainant.

        In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite party is directed to return the cost of the Dish T.V. product  of Rs.2100/- (Rupees two thousand and one hundred only) on taking the invoice mentioned product from the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as compensation  and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/-(Rupees two thousand and five hundred only)  towards litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the  amounts of (Rs.2100/- & Rs.1,000/-) shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order  passed till the date of realization.

                Dictated directly by the Member-I to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 27^th      day of  October   2015.

 

 

MEMBER-I                                        MEMBER-II                                           PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 25.2.2014      - Copy of legal issued by the complainant to the opposite party.

Ex.A2- 3.3.2014        - Copy of Acknowledgment card

Ex.A3- 8.10.2013      - Copy of receipt.

 

Opposite party’s side documents: -    .. Nil ..   (exparte)

 

 

 

MEMBER-I                                         MEMBER-II                                          PRESIDENT.