BEFORE THE  DIST. CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM;  DHARWAD.

DATE: 24^th November 2015        

PRESENT:

1) Shri B.H.Shreeharsha       : President

2) Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi             : Member 

Complaint No.:224/2015    

Complainant/s:      

Smt.Kamalakshi R.Kotur,

Occ: Govt. Service, R/o.H.No.33, Bapuji Nagar, Raj Nagar, Vidyanagar, Near Sai Temple, Hubballi.

(By Sri.B.K.Anand, Adv.)

v/s

Respondent/s:

1. The Branch Manager/ Authorised Signatory, Ganesh Tradelinks, G-10, Eureka Towers, Traffic Island, Hubballi-29.
2. Sony Authorised Service Center, Enkay Complex, Door No.7, 1^st Floor, Kusugal Road, Mati Colony, Hubballi-23.
3. Sony Center, 1034/126, 20^th Main, 5^th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore.

O R D E R

By: Shri. B.H.Shreeharsha : President.

1.     The complainant has filed this complaint claiming for a direction to the respondents to replace the TV, to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony, cost of the proceedings and to grant such other reliefs.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

2.     The case of the complainant is that, the complainant purchased Sony LED KLV 32 inches R422A TV by paying Rs.25,327-51 from respondent.1 manufactured by the respondent.2 on 30.10.2013 under invoice 2093. R2 is the authorized service center of respondent.3. On the day of purchase of the TV respondent.1 delivered and installed the same in the house of the complainant. After installation the complainant noticed black patches, vertical lines on the screen and immediately informed the same to the respondent.1. But respondent 1 did not responded or consider the request of the complainant. Finally on the advise of the respondent.1 the complainant placed the TV to the respondent 2 who is the authorized service center of the respondent.3 on 28.04.2014. After inspection the respondent.2 demanded Rs.15,000/- to rectify the same. Since the defects have been shot out within the warranty period the complainant reluctant to pay the charges. Lastly the complainant got issued legal notice calling upon the respondent to replace the same within 7 days. Despite service of the notice the respondent neither bother to reply nor to set right the defects. It amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, complainant filed the instant complaint praying for the relief as sought.

3.     Despite service of the notice none of the respondents appeared. Hence, placing the respondents 1 to 3 exparte, exparte proceedings initiated.

4.     On the said pleadings the following points have arisen for consideration:

1. Whether complainant has proved that there was deficiency in service on the part of respondents ?
2. Whether complainant is entitled to the relief as claimed ?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled ?

Complainant admits sworn to evidence affidavit, relied on the part of documents.  Heard. Perused the records.

Finding on points is as under.

1.  Affirmatively
2.  Accordingly  
3.  As per order

Reasons

Points 1 and 2

5.     On going through the pleadings & evidence coupled with documents  it is evident that there is no dispute with regard to the fact,  that the complainant had purchased the TV from the respondent no.1 manufactured by the respondent 3 and respondent.2 is the authorized service center of the respondent.3.

6.     Since exparte proceedings has been initiated contentions of the complainant stood unimpeached.

7.     Perusal of the Ex.C2 job sheet reveals the complainant approached the respondent.2 authorized service center on 28.08.2014. In the job sheet Ex.C2 it is mentioned warranty category: standard warranty. In the column authorized service center comments the defects is mentioned “round black patch and vertical  line on the screen (damaged)” Further in the Ex.C2 in the column condition of the set it is mentioned, “scratches found”. Since the respondents specifically respondent.2 also remained absent no details and explanations comeforth with regard to authorized service center comments. So also in what sense “damage” is mentioned also not comingforth.

8.     As per the pleadings, evidence and  as per the submissions of the complainant, from the date of installation, the noted defects have been exhibiting. Notes in the job card further fortify the grievance and defects mentioned by the complainant.

9.     As pointed out supra in the warranty column it is mentioned, standard warranty, no explanation with regard to standard warranty. Even complainant also did not said and explained with regard to meaning of standard warranty. Since the respondent remained absent no much credence is given to unexplained terminologies of the job sheet. However taking into consideration of date of purchase dtd.30.10.2013 invoice Ex.C-1 and approach of the complainant to the service provider dtd.28.08.2014 job sheet Ex.C-2 it is within one year, this leads to consider the defects sought out within the warranty period of one year. Hence, the respondents ought to have set right the defects free of charges in the absence of evidence with regard to at whose instance damage had been caused to the set. Accordingly complainant has established his case of deficiency in service interalia entitled for the relief.

10.   In view of the evidence, observations and discussions we inclined to hold issue.1 affirmatively interalia issue.2 accordingly.

11.   Point.3: In view of the finding on points 1 and 2 proceeded to pass the following 

O R D E R

 Complaint is partly allowed. The respondents. 1 to 3 jointly and severally set right the defects free of charges and return the set to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order without any further delay. Accordingly complainant also directed to approach the respondent.2 immediately with certified copy of this order under acknowledgement. Apart from set righting the defects free of cost the respondents jointly and severally shall pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation along with Rs.1,000/- towards cost of the proceedings within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  Failing to set right the defective set within stipulated period, to replace defects free new set. In the event of  failure to comply above two alternative orders as directed to refund the cost after expiry of stipulated period of 30 days with interest @9% P.A. from 28.08.2014 till realization of the entire amount.

(Dictated to steno, transcribed by him and edited by us and pronounced in the open Forum on this day on 24^th day of November 2015)

(Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi)                                      (Sri.B.H.Shreeharsha)

Member                                                           President

Dist.Consumer Forum                                    Dist.Consumer Forum

MSR