Date of filing:21.5.2013
Date of Disposal:6.3.2014
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II::
VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
Present: SRI A. M. L. NARASIMHA RAO, B.SC., B. L., PRESIDENT
SMT N. TRIPURA SUNDARI, B. COM., B. L., MEMBER
SRI S.SREERAM, B.COM., B.A., B.L., MEMBER
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014.
C.C.No.93 OF 2013.
Between :
GHS Mallikarjuna Rao, S/o Purna Ranga Rao, Hindu, 52 years, Door No.16-109, Mandal office Road, Kankipadu – 521 151, Krishna District.
….. Complainant.
And
1. Sri Kanakadurga Battery & Electrical Works, Rep., by its Proprietor Vallabhaneni Anjaneyulu, 1st Cross, 4th Road, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada – 520 007.
2. M/s Amara Raja Batteries Ltd., Rep., by its Managing Director, 5th Floor, Astra Towers,12P, High Tech City, Kondapur, Hyder4abad – 38.
…..Opposite Parties.
This complaint is coming before us for final hearing on 19.2.2014 in the presence of Sri D.Ravi Kiran, Counsel for complainant and Sri Y.V.Rama Krishna, Counsel for opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 remained absent and upon perusing the material available on record, this Forum delivers the following:
O R D E R
(Delivered by Hon’ble Member Sri S.Sreeram)
This is a complaint filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act with a prayer to direct the opposite parties to replace the defective battery with a new one or refund the battery cost of Rs.5,300/- with interest, to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and damage cause to floor, for costs and other reliefs.
The brief facts which lead to filing the present complaint are that :
1. The complainant has purchased Amaron Battery having Model No.12V/90AH/AAGO202M/217479/AAM-HR-TR600H29R from the 1st opposite party on 18.2.2012 for Rs.5,300/- and that the opposite parties gave two years warranty from the date of purchase. The complainant connected the said battery to his inverter, but to his dismay the said battery started giving troubles within few months of its purchase and on 14.10.2012 the said battery was abruptly stopped its functioning by producing big sound and broken in to pieces. The complainant immediately informed the same to opposite parties and as per their instructions, the said battery was handed over to 1st opposite party on 15.10.2012 with a request to replace the same. The 1st opposite party informed that the defective battery would be sent to 2nd opposite party and new battery will be delivered within 7 days. But so far the opposite parties did not replace the same though it is in warranty period in spite of letter addressed by complainant on 3.11.2012 and legal notice dt.10.1.2013. Hence, the complaint.
2. The 1st opposite party made its appearance and filed version. The 2nd opposite party remained absent. The 1st opposite party apart from denying the allegations made in the complaint contended that the 1st opposite party sold the battery with stipulation as mentioned in warranty card i.e. for exclusive use of Tractor applications and not for inverter purpose and that the warranty condition will be applicable only when the complainant used the battery for tractor applications. The 1st opposite party admitted the receipt of letter and legal notice and contended that except the same, the complainant never handed over the damaged battery to them and further contended that after receipt of letter, they have personally contacted the complainant and requested to hand over the battery, but in vain and further contended that they have no objection to send the alleged battery to the 2nd opposite party technical staff for analysis. It is further contended that they are in the practice to issue job card if they forward any complaint to 2nd opposite party. Finally it is contended that there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
3. The complainant filed his chief affidavit reiterating the contents of his complaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A5. The proprietor of 1st opposite party filed affidavit and got marked Ex.B1 and B2. After the matter is reserved for orders, the complainant filed I.A.no.44/2014 for reopening the case for the purpose of marking the documents. The same is allowed and Ex.A6 and A7 are marked on behalf of complainant.
4. Heard both sides and perused the record.
5. Now the points that arise for consideration is:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in
supplying defective battery to complainant?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
3. To what extent?
POINT No.1 and 2:-
6. On perusal of the material on record i.e., complaint, version and documents, it is an undisputed fact that the 1st opposite party is the dealer of 2nd opposite party and that the complainant purchased the battery from 1st opposite party which is manufactured by 2nd opposite party on 18.2.2012. According to the complainant the said battery has two years warranty period, which is not disputed by the 1st opposite party and the same is evident from Ex,A1 warranty card. The grievance of the complainant is that he purchased the said battery for his inverter purpose and connected the same to his inverter and it functioned for some time and on 14.10.2012 it stopped functioning by producing big sound and broke into pieces causing damage to floor. Immediately he contacted opposite parties 1 and 2 on 15.10.2012 and on their instructions, he handed over the damaged battery to 1st opposite party who assured to deliver new piece within seven days. But so far the opposite parties did not respond in spite of his request and demand through Ex.A2 and A4 respectively. Ex.A3 is courier receipt evidencing the dispatch of Ex.A2 letter and Ex.A5 is acknowledgment of 1st opposite party evidencing receipt of Ex.A4 legal notice.
7. In this regard, the contention of 1st opposite party is that they supplied the battery for exclusive usage to tractors and the same is also evident from Ex.A1 warranty card and the complainant used the same for inverter and as such they are not liable to replace the same. Further it is contended that the complainant except sending Ex.A2 and Ex.A4 has not handed over the battery to 1st opposite party. It is further contended that as and when they received any complaint from customers, they will issue job card and receipt and in the instant case, no such document is filed by complainant, which clearly shows that the complainant has not handed over the damaged piece to them.
8. A careful perusal of Ex.A1 warranty card, discloses that the complainant purchased battery from the 1st opposite party on 18.2.2012. The said fact is not disputed by 1st opposite party also. Further on perusal of back side of Ex.A1, it is clearly mentioned that ’Amaraon Harvest” Tractor batteries. It is not the case of complainant that he has approached the 1st opposite party and asked for the Inverter battery, but the 1st opposite party has supplied the Tractor batteries. Further it is mentioned in the card that the ‘customers are deemed to have read, understood and agreed the conditions at the time of purchase’. Here in this case the complainant is not illiterate and he is working as CEO of Visishata Mutually Aided Co-operateive Thrift Society Ltd., Vijayawada. Being an educated person, he ought to have verified the warranty card at the time of purchase of battery. According to the complainant, he connected the battery to Inverter and it functioned for some time and later started giving troubles. Further it is not the case of complainant that, as per the representation of opposite party that the battery will also be connected to inverter, the complainant connected the same to inverter. To that effect, the complainant also not placed any material before this Forum. In view of the above circumstances and the act of complainant in connecting the Tractor battery to Inverter as admitted by him gives strength to the contentions of opposite party that the complainant knowingly connected the Tractor battery to Inverter and as such the same cannot be covered under the terms and conditions of warranty.
9. With regard to the handing over of defective battery to 1st opposite party, the case of complainant is that as per the instructions of 1st opposite party, he has handed over the battery to 1st opposite party for replacement. On the other hand, the contention of 1st opposite party is that they have not received any battery from complainant. It is further contended that though they contacted personally, the complainant did not hand over the same and that if the battery is handed over to them, they will send it for analysis. To disprove the said allegations, the complainant got marked Ex.A6 and A7 which are acknowledgments issued by 1st opposite party in token of receipt of battery. The learned counsel for 1st opposite party at the time of serving notice on the petition to reopen the matter and to mark the said receipts reported no objection. As such this Forum has no option except to believe the said receipts and come to conclusion that the battery is with the 1st opposite party from 15.10.2012 as alleged by the complainant. Though the complainant to some extent proved the factum of handing over the defective battery to the opposite party, in view of the discussion made in the paragraph No.7, the complainant is not entitled for any relief as sought. No purpose would be served if return of damaged battery is ordered. It is a broken battery and worthless.
POINT No.3
10. In the result, the complaint is liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed without costs.
Typewritten by Stenographer K.Sivaram Prasad, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 6th day of March, 2014.
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For the complainant: For the opposite parties:-
P.W.1 GHS Mallikarjuna Rao D.W.1 V.Anjaneyulu, Complainant 1st opposite party,
(by affidavit) (by affidavit)
DOCUMENTS MARKED
On behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A.1 . . Battery warranty card.
Ex.A.2 03.11.2012 letter from the counsel for the complainant to the counsel for 1st opposite party.
Ex.A.3 . . Photocopy of Courier Receipt.
Ex.A.4 10.01.2013 Office copy of legal notice.
Ex.A.5 . . Postal acknowledgement.
Ex.A.6 15.10.2012 Quotation.
Ex.A.7 15.10.2012 Handwriting on the reverse of a visiting card.
On behalf of the opposite parties:-
Ex.B.1 . . Specimen copy of receipt of the opposite party.
Ex.B.2 . . Specimen copy of job card – Service hub.
PRESIDENT
