Present (1) Sri Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)
President
(3) Sri Sheo Shankar Prasad Singh,
Member
Date of Order- 25.02.15
ORDER
Nisha Nath Ojha
- That the complainant has knocked the doors of the Forum for the following reliefs:-
- To direct the Opposite party No. 1 and 2 to remove the defected T.V. Set.
- To direct the Opposite party to pay Rs. 50,000/-(Fifty thousand Only) as compensation for mental torture.
- The short facts, as appeared from the complaint petition is as follows:-
- The complainant had purchased a Colour Television Set from the Opposite party No.1 on 29.10.2005 after paying Rs. 10,500/-(Ten thousand five hundred only). The aforesaid Television Set bears Model No. HY22F04, Serial No. 112910 which was purchased vide Cash Memo No. 992 from the shop of the Opposite party No.1. The Opposite party No.1 has also issued Certificate of Warranty from which it transpires that he (Opposite party No.1) was authorized dealer of the Opposite party No.2. The grievance of the complainant is that after purchase of the T.V. Set from the Opposite party No.1 on 29.10.2005 the said set had gone out of order on 25.10.2005.
- The complainant has further asserted that when his T.V. Set became out of order then despite repeated information the Opposite party No.1 and 2 did not pay heed to his requests and they neither removed the defects nor took any steps towards redressal of his grievance. Thereafter the complainant sent Vakaltan Notice (Annexure-5 of the complaint petition) to the Opposite parties through advocate namely Mr. Saneev Kumar, which is on the record.
From the order sheet dated 31.05.10 and 26.07.10, it transpires that as per this forum allowed the prayer of the complainant to add two more parties which has been added as the Opposite party No.3 and 4 and new address of the Opposite party No.2 has also been allowed to be written in the complaint petition. Thereafter, as per prayer of the complainant, the notice to the Opposite parties were published in Prabhat Khabar Daily Newspaper dated 08.03.12 but despite publication of notices, the Opposite parties did not appeared and then case has been heard exparte .
We have narrated the relevant facts in the above paras to avoid any confusion with regard to circumstances of this case.
Heard the Learned Counsel for the complainant only and perused the record of this case.
It is the case of the complainant that he(complainant) had purchased T.V Set from the Opposite party No.1 on 29.10.05 after paying Rs.10,500/- vide Cash Memo vide serial 992 dated 29.10.05 issued from the Opposite party No.1. The Opposite party No.1 had also issued Certificate of Warranty which also clearly stipulate that the Hyundai ( the Opposite party No.2) has given 1+2 years extended warranty on the purchase aforesaid T.V. Set from the date of purchase.
It has been also asserted that within a month of purchase of T.V. Set i.e. on 25.11.05, the aforesaid T.V Set had gone out of order and despite several visits and requests the Opposite party No.1 and other Opposite parties did not remove the defect for which the complainant has to face torture of this family members casing him mental tensions and harassment.
As stated above, there is no counter version to the aforesaid assertion of the complaint because the Opposite parties have neither appeared nor filed written statement despite publication of notice in the Newspapers.
We , therefore find and hold that by not removing defects of the T.V. Set purchased by the complainant, the Opposite parties have committed deficiency of service
We, therefore, direct the Opposite party No. 1 to repair the T.V in question in such as way as to remove all defects within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order and if thorough repair is not done then the Opposite party no.2 is directed to refund Rs. 10,500/-(Ten thousand five hundred only) being the price of the T.V within a further period of two months and that too after the T.V in question is returned to him ( Opposite party no.2) by the complainant failing which the Opposite party No.2 is bound to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the aforesaid price amount to the complainant till final payment is made.
We further direct that after repair of the T.V the Opposite party no.1 will also pay to the complainant Rs. 5,000/-(Five thousand only) by way of compensation for mental harassment as well as litigation cost and if the T. V is not repaired then the aforesaid cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) will be paid by the Opposite party no.2.
Thus the complaint petition is allowed to the extent referred above.
Member President
