IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 16th day of January, 2012
Filed on 03-10-2011
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.329/2011
between
Complainant :- | Opposite parties:- |
Sri. Antony Joseph, Chemmagattu House, Avalukunnu P.O, Alappuzha- 6 | Sri. Shamshudheen Seiko Duty Paid Shop, Beema Tower, A.V.J.Junction, Mullakkal, Alappuzha. |
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainant case in a nutshell is as follows: - The complainant on 8th August 2011 purchased a 'torch light' from the opposite party for an amount of Rs.2300/-(Rupees two thousand three hundred only ) . Contrary to the opposite party's assurance, the said torch used to produce light for only a short period. The complainant intimated the opposite party the imperfection of the set. The opposite party procured the torch in question from the complainant offering to get repaired. The complainant was made to walk to and for days on end. Strangely yet, the opposite party has neither give back the torch nor the cost of the same to the complainant. That apart, the opposite party misbehaved with the complainant causing harassment and mental agony to him. Got aggrieved on this the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and relief.
2. On notice being served, the opposite party turned up and offered to settle the matter. Notwithstanding the opposite party's said offer, the opposite party was disinclined to turn up before this Forum thereafter. Resultantly the opposite party was set exparte.
3. The complainant evidence consists of the testimony of the complainant and the
document Exbt Al was marked. The opposite party adduced no evidence.
4. Taking into account the contentions of the parties, the issues that come up before
us for consideration are:-
(a) Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
(b)Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of Service ?
5. It appears that the opposite party neither denies nor disputes the complainant's purchase or the subsequent imperfection of the material article. The complainant's specific case is that on the first instance of its use itself, the material article displayed its shortcoming. The complainant approached the opposite party with the said torch, and the opposite party, in the guise of getting it set right procured the same from the complainant. Thereafter, the opposite party never handed back either the article in question or its price. As we have already observed, the opposite party though turned up before this Forum at the threshold of the proceedings, did not make it a point to pursue the case or to adduce any evidence. The complainant case otherwise established by Exbt Al and his reliable testimony has not been challenged by the opposite party. Needless to say the complainant case inspires confidence in the mind of this Forum, and as such merit acceptance. The opposite party apparently committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
6. In the wake of whatsoever have been discussed hereinabove, the opposite party is directed to pay to the complainant the purchase price of the torch viz.Rs.2300/-(Rupees two thousand and three hundred only ) and a compensation of Rs.2000/-( Rupees two thousand only ) to the complainant . The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 500/-(Rupees five hundred only) towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant. The opposite party shall comply with the order within thirty days of receipt of this order.
The complaint is disposed of accordingly
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 16th day of January 2012.
Sd/- Sri.Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri.K. Anirudhan:
Sd/-Smt. N.Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - Warranty Card
Evidence of the Opposite party:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- sh/-
Compared by-
