IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM

Dated, the 25^th day of September, 2024

Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President

  Smt. Bindhu R.  Member

Sri.K.M.Anto, Member

C C No. 11/2024 (Filed on 10.01.2024)

O R D E R

Smt. Bindhu R.  Member

The complaint is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

The complainant’s TV got defective on 03.06.2023. He registered a complaint before the opposite party and a technician visited the complainant’s house and after examination of the product he informed that the backlight of the TV was complaint and he removed it from the bracket. The technician asked the complaint to take the TV into their office and later informed that, as their office was shifting the TV should be brought after 15 days. On 08.07.2023, the complainant was asked to pay ₹ 3,500/- (Rupees three thousand five hundred only) for the backlight directly in the office of the opposite party and when the son of the complainant went to pay the same no complaint was seen registered in the name of the complainant.

Thereafter, around 18.07.2023 again the opposite party called and asked to bring the TV to their office and the complainant took the TV to the office of the opposite party. The opposite party issued a receipt for the same. On 26.07.2023 the complainant visited the office of the opposite party to inquire about the repair status. Then the staff in the office told him that the TV was repaired. As the complainant lacked proper vision he told the staff to check it by themselves and after packing it, if they inform him he would collect it. The next day, the complainant was informed that the TV was ready for delivery and the complainant went to the office and signed the papers given by the opposite party and returned with the TV and the bill, but he did not know that the said bill was not in his name. When the TV got connected there was a light in the bottom of the screen and in the middle there was a black line. When the service centre was informed, they promised to send a technician, the next day. Again on 31.07.2023, the TV was taken to the service centre and they issued a receipt for the same and after two days also, the TV was not unpacked or serviced when enquired. They informed the complainant that the panel was damaged and the complainant should pay for the same. But the TV had complaint to the back light only not to the panel when the technician of the OP examined it.

Moreover, the opposite party diagnosed the complaint of the TV even without opening the box. The act of the opposite party is deficiency in service and hence liable to compensate the complainant and hence the complaint is filed for a direction to the opposite party to repair the TV free of cost or replace it with a new one along with ₹ 78,000/- (Rupees seventy eight thousand only) towards compensation and ₹ 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) towards cost.

Though the notice to the op was served on 08.05.2024, the  opposite party   had not turned up to file version.

The complainant adduced evidence through proof affidavit and documents which were marked as Exhibit A1.

On the basis of the complaint and evidence we frame the following issues.:

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
2. If so what are the reliefs to be granted?

We have carefully gone through the complaint and understand that the complainant bonafidely submitted his TV with the opposite party but the opposite party was not ready to prepare the TV properly and on time.

The complainant has produced two documents which are the service bill and receipt issued by the opposite parties. The bill is issued in the name of someone else. The opposite party was not careful at least to give a proper bill to the complainant. The  opposite party  has not repaired the TV of the complainant within time and this is a deficiency of service on the part of the  opposite party. In the absence of contrary evidence we infer that, there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party which caused great mental agony to the complainant. The opposite party being the exclusive service centre of Samsung Company is liable to rectify the defects of the complainant’s TV and deliver the same within a reasonable time. Hence, as Consumer Protection Act being a benevolent legislation we answer the issues in favour of the complainant. Thus, the complaint is allowed vide the following order:

1. The opposite party is directed to repair the TV of the complainant free of cost within 30 days.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony and hardships. No cost is ordered.
3. The order shall be complied within 30 days failing which the award amount shall carry on interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 25^th day of September, 2024

    Smt. Bindhu R.  Member    Sd/-

    Sri. Manulal V.S, President  Sd/-

    Sri. K.M. Anto, Member      Sd/-

APPENDIX :

Exhibits from the side of the Complainant :

A1     -  Copy of cash receipt dated 27.07.2023

Exhibits from the side of the Opposite Parties :  NIL

By Order,

    Sd/-

                                                                                                Assistant Registrar