BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CACHAR :: SILCHAR
Con. Case No. 9 of 2017
Sri Bharat Baroi, ………………..……………………………………………. Complainant.
V/S
- Sri. Prodip Bhowmik.
P.O- Itkhola, Ghaniawala Road
P.S & P.O. – Silchar, Ward No.- 3
Dist:- Cachar (Assam)
Pin- 788001. ………………………………………………………… Opp. Party No.1.
- Barak Telecommunication Networks
OF: Hospital Road.
P.S & P.O- Silchar,
Dist: Cachar (Assam)
Pin- 788001. ……………….…………………………………………. Opp. Party No.2.
Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President,
District Consumer Forum,
Cachar, Silchar.
Mrs. Chandana Purkayastha, Member,
District Consumer Forum,
Cachar, Silchar.
Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member,
District Consumer Forum,
Cachar, Silchar.
Appeared :- Sri Bharat Baroi, Complainant Self.
None for O.Ps.
Date of Evidence……………………….. 28-08-2017
Date of argument………………………. 12-10-2017
Date of judgment………………………. 27-10-2017
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
Sri Bishnu Debnath,
- Sri Bharat Baroi brought this Case against Sri Prodip Bhowmik, the cable operator and Barak Telecommunication Network, Silchar for award of compensation on account of disservice in respect of Set Top Box of cable connection.
- He stated that he has taken cable connection from the O.P on 10/05/2017 on paying of Rs.1800 as cost of set top box with monthly rental of Rs.200 but the O.P provided a set top box which mismatched with warrantee card No. CC441S121604. Accordingly, approached the O.P to do needful but the O.P did not provide set top box as per the warrantee card. Hence, on his desire the cable connection was disconnection but neither the set top box has taken back nor the deposited amount of Rs.1800 refunded.
- Notice issued to O.P. Notice served but O.P did not contest the case. Thus, the Complainant deposed on oath and submitted his oral argument.
- In this case from the material on record it is revealed that the warrantee card bears No.CC441S121604 but the set top box provided bearing No.CC441S1216077234. The Complainant further deposed that on approached the O.P changed the set top and provided Set Top Box No.CC441S1216073698 but warrantee card remain as earlier. Hence, he requested to do needful. The evidence also adduced that the cable connection was disconnected as per desire of the Complainant but set top box was not taken back and money did not refund. The reasoning of the complaint is that when the service is not provided, than the O.P. should refund the price of set top box of Rs.1800/- but the O.P. did not pay the amount.
- However, in this case we do not find any reply of the O.P. because they are not contesting the case. That is why, keeping the matter exparte we believe the fact stated by the Complainant.
- So, as per the fact reveal from the evidence, the O.P. without any justified cause supplied set top box twice mismatching the warrantee card. Why it was done by the O.P. is not known to us. If warrantee card is issued regarding set top box, the number mentioned in the set top box should be reflected in the warrantee card. If the number mismatch, than very purpose of issuing of warrantee card will be frustrated.
7. Hence, in this case the Complainant rightly approached to provide the set top box as per number mentioned in the warrantee card but O.P. did not do so.
- So, the above modus operandi of the O.P. revealed from evidence on record is nothing but unfair trade practice as per provision of section 2 (1) (2) of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986. So, the O.P. is liable to refund the price of set top box along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only and cost of the proceeding of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only. The above awarded amount of total Rs.6,000/-(Rupees Six thousand) only to be paid within 45 days from today. In default the awarded amount will be fetch interest at rate of 10% per annum with effect from the date of passing this order to till realization of the full.
- With the above, this case is disposed of without contest. Supply free certified copy of judgment to the parties.Given under the hand of the President and Members of this District Forum and seal of the Office of the District Forum on this the 1st day of August, 2017.
