BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN                                             : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                                       : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU V.R                                                           : MEMBER

C.C. No. 320/2022 Filed on 10/08/2022

ORDER DATED: 30/12/2022

ORDER

SRI. VIJU V.R : MEMBER

The complainant has presented this complaint before this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.  The brief facts of the case is that the opposite party installed iBell’s CC TV Camera in the house of complainant on 26/02/2022.  The complainant paid Rs.35,500/- to the opposite party for the installation of CC TV Camera.  On 20/06/2022 onwards the HDMI of the camera was not working.  The product has got 5 years warranty as well as 2 years service warranty.  The complainant contacted the opposite party several times for servicing the CC TV Camera, but the opposite party did not turn up.  The act of the opposite party caused much mental agony and monitory loss to the complainant.  The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service, hence this complaint.

Even though the opposite party received the notice, the opposite party did not appear before this Commission, hence the opposite party was set ex parte. 

Issues to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service from the side of opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs?

Issues (i) & (ii):  The complainant has filed proof affidavit and has produced 2 documents which were marked as P1 and P2.  On going through Ext.P2 it can be seen that the complainant has paid Rs.35,500/- to the opposite party for installing CC TV camera and also it is evident that the product has got 5 year warranty as well as 2 year service warranty.  The opposite party is bound to service the CC TV camera, but he haven’t done that.  From the documents produced by the complainant we find that the complainant has succeeded in proving his case and there deficiency in service from the side of the opposite party.  Hence the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant. 

In the result the complaint is allowed.  The opposite party is directed to repay Rs.35,500/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Five Hundred Only) to the complainant and can take back the CC TV Camera and pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and pay Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) towards the cost of the proceedings within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost carries interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. 

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements is forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th  day of December, 2022.    

Sd/-

                                                P.V.JAYARAJAN                 : PRESIDENT

          Sd/-

PREETHA G. NAIR             : MEMBER   

 Sd/-

                                                                 VIJU V.R                           : MEMBER   

C.C.No.320/2022

    APPENDIX

I           COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

II          COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

III         OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                                                NIL

IV        OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                        NIL

                                                                                                       Sd/-

PRESIDENT