West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/7/2013

Miss Ankita Banerje - Complainant(s)

Versus

The INOX - Opp.Party(s)

01 Oct 2013

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

 Complaint case No.07/2013                                                                                        

 BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr. Sujit Kumar Das.

                                                      MEMBER :  Mr. Kapot Chattopadhayay.                                                    

Order No.11                                                                                            Dated :-01/10/2013.

               Complainant is present. Heard Exparte.                  

                Case of the complaint is short is that an A.C machine was purchased by the complainant on 25/06/12 and the same was installed at the cost of Rs.1500+559 against money receipt dated 28/06/12. After payment of total cost of Rs.43,850/- on 25/06/12 as a price of the said A.C machine was not functioning properly. For its repair several requests were made but the Op. refused. Stating the case the petitioner came before us for seeking relief in terms of the prayer mentioned in the petitioners complaint.

               Inspite of due notice, the Op. did not appear and as a result the case in taken up exparte hearing.

              Considering the submission of Ld. Advocate for the complainant we have carefully perused the complaint case together with certain documents in original by firisti produced at the time of hearing. It appears that the complainant purchased one Hitachi 1.5 ton split A.C. machine at the cost of Rs.43,850/- on 25/06/12 from the Op. But it is surprising to know that there is no complaint submitted before the Op. stating alleged non-functioning of the said A.C. machine and for its repairing. Even no such information supported by dependable documentary evidence save and except a notice dated 22/10/12 issued by Advocate an behalf of the complainant. In this context it is very important to note that the complainant came to us with this petition of complaint on 18/01/13. For argument sake, if we accept the date (22/10/12) of communication of alleged nonfunctioning of the A.C. machine and its repairing work, then it would not be reasonable to say anything adverse against the Op. who in fact could not get any opportunity for rendering their service for repairing the A.C. machine as requested for. There is no act of request in anyform what so ever intimating the alleged nonfunctioning of the A.C. machine and for its repairing during the period from the date of installation of the A.C. machine on 28/06/12 and the date of Advocate notice date 22/10/12 for filing this case.

           Contd…………………P/2  

 

- ( 2 ) -

                 Under the facts and circumstances we do not find any bonafide case amounting to deficiency of service against the Op. and as such the complainant should not get any order in  favour of the relief as prayed for.

              Hence,

                             Ordered,

                                            that the case be end the same is dismissed.

Dic. & corrected by me

    

         Member                                                                                         President

                                                                                                           District Forum

                                                                                                        Paschim Medinipur.