West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/357/2015

Sri Bijay Naskar, S/O Sri Siddhartha Naskar. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Timir Mondal, Proprietor of Mondal Cable Net work A unit of Sristy Netcom. - Opp.Party(s)

Nitai Ch. Saha.

27 Apr 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144

 

      C.C. CASE NO. _357_ OF ___2015_

 

DATE OF FILING : 5.8.2015                       DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:  27.4.2016

 

Present                        :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :     Subrata Sarkar

                                                                             

COMPLAINANT        :    Sri Bijay Naskar,s/o Sri Siddhartha Naskar of Sapa Mirza Nagar, P.O Sarkarpool, P.S. Maheshtala, Dist. South 24-Parganas.

 

•  VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                            :  Sri Timiur Mondal, Prop. Of Mondal Cable Network, A unit of Sristi Netcom, Gopalpur, P.S. Maheshtala, South 24-Parganas, Kol-143.

 

_______________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

Subrata Sarker, Member

This is an application under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 filed by the complainant on a ground that the complainant is a Member of Mondal Cable Network , Proprietor Shri Timir Mondal, a unit of Sristi Netcom.

The O.P provided a Set Top Box and installed cable line at the complainant’s house.

On 22.3.2015 the said Set Top Box was not functioning and complainant reported the same to the O.P and O.P brought another Set Top Box with him and asked the complainant not to touch the said cable line as there was electric current on that cable line.

Thereafter the complainant requested O.P for several times to install the said Set Top Box but O.P did not take any care.

Ultimately O.P installed the said Set Top Box on 4.4.2015 and after installation of said Set Top Box within 30 minutes a fire was caused due to short circuit through the said Set Top Box and due to such fire the complainant and his family members suffered tremendous mental anxiety and mental agony. Due to such accident the complainant’s T.V, cable line and other valuable furniture was caught fire and it was badly damaged.

Point of decision is whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P.

Inspite of service of summon O.P did not contest the case. Hence, the case is proceeding exparte against the O.P.

                                                            Decision with reasons

This is undoubtedly a bad gesture of O.P that he took away the Set Top Box but did not take care that there was electric current on that cable line. Further after installation of new Set Top Box a fire was caused within 30 minutes due to short circuit and for which T.V , cable line and other valuable furniture of the complainant caught fire. But complainant could not submit any proof of such damage. Moreover, there is nothing mentioned in the report of Licensed Electrician that the fire was initiated through the said Set Top Box . But certainly there is a lapse of O.P to keep open the line of set top box where there was electric current and he did not take care to install a new set top box in time.

Hence,

                                                                        Ordered

That the complainant’s case is allowed in exparte against the O.P.

The O.P is directed to replace the said Set Top Box with a new one with warranty .

Complainant is directed to return the old Set Top Box after installation of the new one and the same will be taken back by the O.P.

O.P is also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2000/-.

O.P has to replace the Set Top Box with fresh warranty plus compensation and litigation cost within 30 days from this order, failing which, complainant is at liberty to execute the said order through this Forum and in that event, further Rs.5000/- towards punitive damage has to be paid by the O.P and that amount will be deposited in Consumer Legal Aid Fund of South 24-Parganas Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P positively  through speed post.

 

                                                Member                                                                       President

 

Dictated and corrected by me

                               

 

                        Member

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The judgement in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

 

                                                           

Ordered

That the complainant’s case is allowed in exparte against the O.P.

The O.P is directed to replace the said Set Top Box with a new one with warranty .

Complainant is directed to return the old Set Top Box after installation of the new one and the same will be taken back by the O.P.

O.P is also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2000/-.

O.P has to replace the Set Top Box with fresh warranty plus compensation and litigation cost within 30 days from this order, failing which, complainant is at liberty to execute the said order through this Forum and in that event, further Rs.5000/- towards punitive damage has to be paid by the O.P and that amount will be deposited in Consumer Legal Aid Fund of South 24-Parganas Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P positively  through speed post.

 

                                                Member                                                                       President