`DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JHARSUGUDA
****************
CONSUMER CASE NO.75/2022
Barun Kumar Sagar, Aged 36 years
S/o-Late Fakir Sagar,
R/o-Word No.4, Kuchinda, Po/Ps-Kuchinda,
Dist.-Sambalpur,Odisha...……………………………………..…………Complainant.
Versus
Jogendra Nath Parida, Proprietor,
SP CONSTRUCTION & JP ENTERPRISES,
Ro/-Bombay Chowk,Jharsuguda,
Ps/Dist.-Jharsuguda, Odisha…………………………………….…………Opp. Party.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant Self.
For the Opp. Party Sri. B.N. Dutta, Adv. & Associates.
Present:- 1. Smt. Jigeesha Mishra, President.
2. Smt. Anju Agarwal, Member.
Date of hearing- 05.04.2023 Date of order- 28.06.2023
Presented by, Smt. Jigeesha Mishra,President : -
1.The case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased an EWC tank less F92593(18) Hindware amounting to Rs.20,500/- ( Rupees twenty thousand five hundred) only from O.P on dated 08.10.2022 in shape of UPI payment vide transaction ID No T2209251758573484847523. The complainant has purchased the said item for installation at his extended bathroom in ground floor. The representative of O.P came to the residential house and installed it in the newly constructed extended latrine and bathroom. On the same day the complainant noticed that the said equipment is not working properly. The defect is in the force of water. The complainant immediately intimated the problem to the O.P. The O.P expressed his inability to remove the defect and supplied a customer care number. The complainant made telephonic contact with customer care number. One technician came to the residential house of complainant and inspected the said equipment and disclosed that the problem cannot be removed as the said equipment is designed for installation in an area which is supported by water tank in 2nd and 3rd floor of the building. It is the duty of the O.P to educate and inform the complainant regarding criteria of equipment. The O.P did not disclose the criteria of equipment, which amounts to deficiency in service of the O.P. Hence the complainant filed this case before this commission.
2.The case of the opposite party is that the opposite party filed its version and admitted that the complainant has purchased a EWC tank less F92593(18) Hindware with an amount of Rs.20,500/- on 08.10.2022 from the O.P. The O.P. submitted that when the complainant made an oral complaint before the opposite party that the equipment was not working properly due to low pressure of water. The O.P being the authorized dealer provide the customer care number and address of the Hindware Company. The complainant made complaint before the company and company representative visited the installation area and found no defect on the equipment. The equipment is not properly working due to low pressure of water. Therefore the company representative suggested to make double height of water tank so as to proper pressurize the water level to clear the waste material. But instead of execute the suggestion, the complainant filed this case against the O.P. There is no deficiency on the part of the O.P. Hence the O.P prayed for dismissal of the case.
3.Perused the records and it reveals that the O.P submitted a report that there is low pressure of water because water tank height is 8 to 9 feet . As per communication the Hindware company inspected the installation area and provided report. The defect is in water pressures. There is no defect in the product. The O.P as the dealer communicated the company. The dealer has no responsibility in this case.
As per supra discussion the following order is passed:-
ORDER
The complaint is dismissed on contest. The complainant is not entitled for any relief.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th day of June’ 2023 Supply free copy to the parties.
I Agree
A. Agrawal, Member J. Mishra, President
Dictated and corrected by me
J. Mishra, President
