Orissa

Cuttak

CC/89/2022

Bikram Kishore Beura - Complainant(s)

Versus

Tata Unistore Limited - Opp.Party(s)

S K Choudhury & associates

22 Sep 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                                C.C.No.89/2022

Bikram Kishore Beura,

S/O:Natakishore Beura,

At:Mahamadia Bazar,PO:Chandini Chowk,

P.S:Lalbag,Dist:Cuttack-753002,Odisha.                                     ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.        Tata Unistore Limited,

4^th Floor,Empire Plaza 2,Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg

Chandan Nagar,Mumbai,

Maharashtra-400083(Maharashtra).

 

2.        Tata Unistore Limited,

Optimizing resources Pvt. Ltd.,Khasra No.563,Gram Natkur,

Bijnor Sarojini Nagar,Luknow-226008,

Uttar Pradesh.                                                                                  ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    17.05.2022

Date of Order:   22.09.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. S.K.Choudhury,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps no.1 & 2:                 None.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President. 

            Case of the complainant bereft unnecessary details as made out from the complaint petition in short is that he had purchased for a consideration of R 12,990/- on 13.1.22 a new television set of Kodak 80cm(32 inches) Android Smart HD Ready LED TV 32HDX7XPRO)2020 Model,Black with IMEI Serial number k32hdx7xpro2021055677.  The said T.V was delivered to him at his address on 29.1.22 through Blue Dart Courier Service.  On 5.2.22 the mechanic of the O.Ps came to the house of the complainant and while installation, they found that the television set was damaged and cracked for which it was unable to be connected to the power supply.  When the complainant wanted the broken television set to be replaced or in lieu of it, to get refund of the consideration amount of Rs.12,990/-, the O.Ps had not responded even though the complainant had repeatedly persuaded them for the same.  The complainant had also issued the legal notice to the O.Ps and ultimately had to file this case claiming refund of cost of his television set together with a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards his mental agony and another sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the litigation expenses, a sum of Rs.7010/- towards other expenses alongwith interest @ 13.5% or to provide a new television set with proper working condition alongwith a sum of Rs.27,010/- towards the litigation expenses, mental agony etc.

2.         Having not contested this case, the O.Ps were set exparte vide order dt.20.7.22.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

            ii.         Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps ?

            iii.        Whether the O.Ps had practised any unfair trade ?

            iv.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed?

Points no.ii & iii.

            Points no.ii & iii being the pertinent points are to be determined together first  here in this case.

            The averments of the complainant together with supportive documents as available in this case, it goes without saying that the complainant had infact purchased a television set which when found to be cracked was requested by him repeatedly for its replacement/repair.  The O.Ps by turning a deaf ear towards the request of the complainant had of course been deficient in their service towards the complainant and thereby had practised unfair trade.  Accordingly, these two points go against the O.Ps.

Points no.i & iv.

            From the above discussions, the cased of the complainant is definitely maintainable and the complainant is entitled to reasonable extent of the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is allowed exparte against the O.Ps who are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  The O.Ps are thereby directed to replace the broken television set of the complainant within a month hence and pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony as suffered by the complainant together with a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards his litigation expenses.  In case the O.Ps failed to replace the same model of T.V set, they will liable to be refund a sum of Rs.12,990/- to the complainant alongwith interest thereon @ 9% per annum with effect from 21.1.22 till the total amount is quantified.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 22^nd day of   September,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                              Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                               Member