Date of filing: 19.05.2014.
Date of disposal: 27.8.2014.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM - II:
VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT
Present: Smt N. Tripura Sundari, B. Com., B. L., President (FAC)
Sri S. Sreeram, B.Com., B.A., B.L., Member
Wednesday, the 27th day of August, 2014
C.C.No.117 of 2014
Between:
A.L. Narayana, S/o Yella manda (late), Occ: Retired Employee, R/o Guru Nivas, D.No.1-3-24-23/8, Aravinda Street, Vidhyadharapuram, Vijayawada – 52002.
…..Complainant
And
1. The Authorized Signatory, ANU Solar Pvt., Ltd., Head Office, #248, 3rd Cross, 8th Maih, 3rd Phase, Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore – 58.
2. The Branch Manager, ANU Solar Pvt., Ltd., 1-2-288/23/4, Domalaguda Rama Krishna Matt Marg, Near Indira Park, Hyderabad – 20.
3. The Branch Manager, ANU Solar Pvt., Ltd., Branch Office, #30-8-17, Namubrivari Street, Opp: Road to Spencer Super Market, Near Eluru Road, Durga Agraharam, Vijayawada – 2.
.. … Opposite parties.
This complaint coming on before the Forum for final hearing on 21.8.2014, in the presence of Sri P. Chitti Babu, advocate for complainant opposite parties 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 Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties 1 to 3 directing them to pay Rs.23,500/- towards cost of 250 LPD Solar water Heater system, Rs.20,000/- towards damages, compensation and for deficiency of service, Rs.1,00,000/- towards damage to the slab of building, for costs and other reliefs.
1. The brief averments of the complaint are as follows:
The complainant being induced by the representations made by the opposite parties 1 to 3 about the Solar water heater products, approached the 3rd opposite party on 31-3-2012 and purchased 250 LPD Solar water Heater system for Rs.23,500/- and paid Rs.5,000/- as advance on 31.3.2012 and the balance of Rs.18,500/- was paid on 12.4.2012. Accordingly the 3rd opposite party raised invoice No.514 and dispatched the system to the complainant. Subsequently the opposite parties technicians visited the house of complainant and installed the same. The opposite parties has not issued any guarantee card, but as per the broacher, 250 LPD Solar Water System has guarantee of five years. While so, from the last few months, there is a leakage either sides from the water tank and the same was informed to the opposite parties by complainant over phone and he also made number of complaints. But the opposite parties failed to rectify the problem, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant got issued a legal notice on 19.4.2014 to the opposite parties demanding them to replace the defective 250 LPD Solar water system with new one. The 1st opposite party received the notice and contacted the complainant and assured to replace the same, but in vain. The notices of opposite parties 2 and 3 returned. Hence, the complaint.
2. After registering the complaint, notices were sent to the opposite parties. The 1st opposite party was called absent. As the notices of opposite parties 2 and 3 were not served, this Forum ordered notice by way of substitute service and accordingly the notice was published in daily paper. Subsequently the opposite parties 2 and 3 were also called absent.
3. The complainant filed his chief affidavit reiterating the material averments of the complaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A9 on her behalf. None were examined on behalf of the opposite parties 1 to 3.
4. Heard complainant and perused the record.
5. Now the points that stood for consideration are
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties in supplying the defective Solar Water Heater to complainant?
- If so, to what relief.
Point No.1:
6. The undisputed facts in this case are that the complainant purchased the 250 LPD Solar Water System from the 3rd opposite party on 31.3.2012, which was being manufactured by opposite party No.1 for Rs.23,500/-. Ex.A1 receipt dt.31.3.2012 discloses that the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- as advance and Ex.A2 receipt dt.11.4.2012 discloses that the complainant paid balance of Rs.18,500/-. Accordingly the 3rd opposite party after receipt of amount raised invoice under Ex.A3 in the name of complainant for Rs.23,500/- and subsequently the technicians of opposite parties installed the same. The main grievance of the complainant is that from the last few months, there is a leakage either sides from the water tank and he informed the same to opposite parties over phone and also made number of complaints, but of no use. As such he got issued legal notice under Ex.A5 demanding the opposite parties to replace the defective water tank with new one. Ex.A6 postal receipts are evidencing the dispatch of legal notice. Notices of opposite parties 2 and 3 returned un-served under Ex.A7 and A8. The 1st opposite party received notice under Ex.A9.
7. Perusal of record discloses that the opposite parties 1 to 3 in this case were called absent. As such the allegations so far as guided against them in the complaint and the documentary evidence under Ex.A1 to A9 are remained unchallenged. Though the 1st opposite party received notice under EX.A9 failed to give reply. Further the 1st opposite party though received notices in this case not chosen to make its appearance and filed its version. As the notices on opposite parties 2 and 3 were not served, their notices were published in daily paper. Even after that they did not make their appearance. As such this Forum has no option except to believe the version of complainant. According to the complainant the opposite parties at the time of purchase has not provided the guarantee card and it was mentioned in the invoice under Ex.A3 and that the broacher under Ex.A4 discloses the warranty period for subject water heater is 5 years. Perusal of Ex.A3 discloses that the item was handed over to complainant in good condition except the guarantee card. As such we would like to consider the Ex.A4 broacher where under it is mentioned as ‘five years guarantee’. The complainant purchased the item in the year 2012 and as such the same is within warrantee. According to complainant, there was leakage of water from either sides of tank and the same was informed to opposite parties, but of no use. As the opposite parties not filed any version denying the allegations made against them, there can be no hesitation in holding that there was a leakage of water, which is a manufacturing defect. Further as the guarantee period is in existence, the opposite parties are liable to rectify the defect, which was not done by opposite parties. As such we hold that there is a deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
8. According to complainant, due to leakage of water, the slab was damaged and as such claimed Rs.1,00,000/- towards damages. But in this regard, he has not produced any documentary evidence such as Engineer’s report etc. Hence, the complainant is not entitled for the said relief. Further according to complainant, from the last few months, there is a leakage of water from the tank. The complainant purchased the same in the month of March, 2012 and issued notice in the month of April, 2014. As such he would have utilized the said item for nearly two years without any defect. As such we are not inclined to grant interest, compensation to complainant.
9. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties 1 to 3 jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.23,500/- to the complainant towards costs of the water system besides costs including publication charges at Rs.2000/-. Time for compliance is one month. The complainant is directed to hand over the defective water system to the opposite parties on payment of amount ordered by the Forum. The other claims of complainant shall stands dismissed.
Typewritten by Steno N. Hazarathaiah, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 27th day of August, 2014.
PRESIDENT (FAC) MEMBER
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined
For the complainant: -None- For the opposite party: -None-
Documents marked
On behalf of the complainant:
Ex.A1 31.03.2012 Original copy of cash receipt.
Ex.A2 11.04.2012 Original copy of cash receipt.
Ex.A3 12.04.2012 Original copy of invoice.
Ex.A4 Brochure.
Ex.A5 Copy of legal notice got issued by complainant to OPs.
Ex.A6 Postal receipts.
Ex.A7 Returned postal cover.
Ex.A8 Returned postal cover.
Ex.A9 Photocopy of postal acknowledgement.
On behalf of the opposite parties: - Nil-
PRESIDENT (FAC).
