Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 21.02.2018
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite party to exchange the A.C. Machine of the complainant by providing a new A.C. Machine.
- To direct the opposite party to pay claim amount of Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty Thousand only ) for physical and mental agony, Rs. 4,00,000/- ( Rs. Four Lacs only ) for financial loss and Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) for cost of litigation to the complainant.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a Air Conditioner i.e. Hitachi A.C. split vide annexure – 1 on 30.05.2013 after paying the cost of Rs. 41,500/-. The aforesaid air conditioner machine became out of order on 26.05.2015. When the aforesaid machine became out of order, the complainant contacted opposite party and requested him to either to exchange it by way of new machine or to repair it so that it may function properly but the opposite party on one pertext or other did not pay heed to the aforesaid request of the complainant. Thereafter the complainant sent a legal notice vide annexure – 2 to opposite party and thereafter on 12.08.2015 a reminder was also sent to opposite party vide annexure – 3.
It has been asserted that complainant is a Doctor by profession and the aforesaid Air Conditioner was purchased for relief of his patient but the conduct of the opposite party has affected the complainant and its patient.
It appears from the record that when the opposite party did not appeared and the registered notice dated 30.11.2015 did not returned then the valid Tamila was declared vide order dated 21.10.2016 and this case was heard ex – parte as the opposite party did not choose to file written statement despite allowing sufficient opportunity by this forum.
In this complaint the complainant has asserted that after purchasing the aforesaid air conditioner vide annexure – 1 on 30.05.2013 it become out of order on 26.05.2015 during the warranty period but no any warranty card etc. has been annexed with this complaint. There is no evidence to show that complainant had ever attempted to take the aforesaid air conditioner in service center of the Hitachi Company.
From own assertion of the complainant it is crystal clear that the aforesaid air conditioner become out of order about after two years after purchasing the aforesaid air conditioner.
In absence of any warranty card or any evidence that the aforesaid machine was taken for the repair in service center, we are unable to know the nature of the defect because in the whole of the complaint the nature of defect has not been mentioned.
In absence of aforesaid fact it is not proper for us to hold any deficiency on the part of opposite party because we are not able to peruse either warranty card etc. from which it is established that the aforesaid air conditioner became out of order during warranty period.
It goes without saying that complainant has to prove allegation after annexing relevant papers which has not been done in this complaint because merely assertion on oath in absence of relevant papers is not sufficient to hold deficiency on the part of opposite party.
For the discussion made above this complaint petition stands dismissed with liberty to the complainant to take appropriate steps for redressal of his grievance either in appropriate court or authority etc. in accordance with law.
Member President
