Order by:

Sh.Mohinder Singh Brar, Member

1.           The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that the complainant was in need of 4 cameras and other accessories of good quality and he contacted Opposite Party and Opposite Party assured that he will install 4 camera and other accessories of good quality of standard company. Opposite Party has charged Rs.36,850/- on account of price of camera and other accessories, vide invoice no.719 dated 25.03.2022. Opposite Party has also charged Rs.3960/- on account of price of electricity board and other accessories vide invoice no.724 dated 30.03.2022. Opposite Party has not mentioned the name and brand or manufacturer of any item except item no.1 & 2 in invoice no.719 dated 25.03.2022 as well as in invoice no.724 dated 30.03.2022. The complainant was assured by the Opposite Party that there will not be any problem with regard to the said cameras and accessories and also given guarantee for one year against any defect in the cameras and accessories. However, the said cameras and accessories were not working properly. There is no visibility of picture of person in these cameras. The complainant cannot judge the person through these cameras, thus same are useless and are headache for the complainant. The complainant has made complaint to the Opposite Party. The mechanic of the Opposite Party has come and removed VIFI4 G Box from the house for which he has charged Rs.2800/- and again demanded Rs.2800/- for the same spare part for which he has got no right to do so. The complainant again approached the Opposite Party and requested either to repair/replace or refund the said amount, but the Opposite Party has refused to do any action. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Party may be directed to replace the 5 MP colour night vision IP Camera (4) Leserenity or to refund the amount of Rs.40810/- received by them vide invoice no.719 and 724/-.

b)      To pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment suffered by the complainant.

c)       And any other relief which this Commission deem fit and proper be granted to the complainant in the interest of justice and equity.

2.       Opposite Party appeared through counsel and filed the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant has not come with clean hands before this Commission. In fact complainant has not paid full and final payment of invoice no.719 and 724 and Rs.10,000/- is still outstanding against the complainant. The complainant had promised to pay the outstanding amount after few days of installation of CCTV Cameras, but he did not pay the outstanding amount on the demand of Opposite Party again and again. Instead of making the payment, he filed this false and frivolous complaint against the Opposite Party in this Commission. Moreover, Opposite Party never refused to replace any piece, if defective. Opposite Party has installed IP Camera 5 mega pixel coloured night vision with Audio and NVR, which is the best and latest technology in today time and they are working satisfactory. Complainant has not made any complaint about the working of CCTV system alongwith NVR. Actually complainant has damaged the SIM slot of Wifi Box in which SIM is detected for internet, by circuitry of Wifi box while trying to get box working by hit and trial method, which costs of Rs.2800/- mentioned in the invoice no.719 without checking the recharge validity of the SIM which was expired. Inspite of repeated requests and advice, the complainant tempered the device himself in warranty. This issue was discussed with complainant and he asked to replace the said Wifi Box with new and in response the Opposite Party replaced the Wifi Box with new. While Opposite Party is ready to replace the defected camera of Wifi box, if it is defective, but till today the Opposite Party has not received any complaint regarding the working of the system. The CCTV system installed by the Opposite Party is still working properly. The brand of the CCTV cameras are mentioned on the CCTV Camera and NVR itself. On merits, all other facts mentioned in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.

3.       Complainant has also filed replication to the written reply of the Opposite Party denying the objections raised by Opposite Party in its written reply.

4.       In order to prove his case, complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C1, his additional affidavit Ex.C2 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C3 to Ex.C5.

5.       To rebut the evidence of complainant, Opposite Party tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Krishan Kumar Sharma, Manager of Shin Technologies Inc. Ex.OP1.

6.       We have heard the complainant in person as well as ld. counsel for the Opposite Parties and have gone through the record.

7.       The case of the complainant is that the complainant got installed 4 CCTV cameras alongwith other accessories from Opposite Party, who charged Rs.36,850/- on account of price of camera and other accessories, vide invoice no.719 dated 25.03.2022. Opposite Party has also charged Rs.3960/- on account of price of electricity board and other accessories vide invoice no.724 dated 30.03.2022, but the Opposite Party did not disclosed the name and brand or manufacturer of any item except item no.1 & 2 in invoice no.719 & 724.  The Opposite Party given guarantee of one year on the cameras and accessories against any defect. However, the said cameras and accessories were not working properly. There is no visibility of picture of person in these cameras. The complainant cannot judge the person through these cameras, thus same are useless and are headache for the complainant. The complainant has made complaint to the Opposite Party. The mechanic of the Opposite Party has come and removed VIFI4 G Box from the house for which he demanded Rs.2800/-.  The complainant again approached the Opposite Party and requested either to repair, replace or refund the said amount, but to no effect.

7.       Ld. counsel for the Opposite Party has contended that the complainant has damaged the SIM slot of Wifi Box in which SIM is detected for internet, by circuitry of Wifi box while trying to get box working by hit and trial method without checking the recharged validity of the SIM which was expired. Inspite of repeated requests and advice, the complainant tampered the device himself in warranty period and the complainant was asked to replace the said Wifi Box with new and in response the Opposite Party replaced the Wifi Box with new.

7.       We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and gone through the record on file by both the parties. The complainant purchased 5 MP Color Night Vision Cameras Leserenity along with other accessories vide invoice no.719 dated 25.03.2022 and invoice no.724 dated 30.03.2022. Complainant in his complaint in para no.11 & 12 submitted that he made complaint to the Opposite Party regarding the defect in cameras, but he has not mentioned on which date he made the complaint to the Opposite Party nor he has placed on record any documentary evidence in this regard. Complainant has failed to produce on record an iota of evidence in support of their allegations. Even the complainant has not brought on record any expert report to proof this fact that the cameras are not working properly. However, manager of Opposite Party in its affidavit mentioned that complainant himself damaged the SIM Slot of wifi Box by hit and trial method in which SIM is detected for internet.

8.       In view of the discussion above, the complaint of the complaint is hereby dismissed for want of evidence. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties, free of costs. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

Announced in Open Commission.