Mrs. Ranu Pal,

wife of Proloy Kumar Pal

of Satashi Dakshinpara, Santragachi,

P.S. Jagacha, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711 112. -----------------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.         The Manager,

            ION Exchange ( India ) Ltd.,

            New Alipore Market Complex,

            Block – M Phase – I ( 5^th floor ),

            Kolkata – 700 053.

2.         The Manager,

      ION Exchange ( India )  Ltd.

      Home Water Solutions,

      ION House, Plot No. 3, Sector – 18,

      Vashi, Navi Mumbai,

      PIN - 400705.

3.         The Manager,

            Balaji Agency,

            Stockist, ION Exchange India Ltd.,

            127, B.K. Pal Avenue,

            Kolkata – 700 005. -----------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P   R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  Complainant Ranu Pal by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as

amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to replace the water purifier in question or to refund the purchase price of the same with interest, to pay an amount of  Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony, physical harassment along with Rs. 20,000/- as litigation cost incidental to the filing of this instant petition and other order or orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.

2.                  Complainant purchased one water purifier from O.P. no. 3 on 19-05-2012,

manufactured by O.P. nos. 1 & 2, on payment of Rs. 27,000/-, which was delivered by O.P. no. 3 on 21-05-2012 to the complainant’s house at Jagacha, Howrah, vide annexures attached with this petition. But immediately  after few days, since 10-01-2013, complainant found that her entire purified water was getting drained as it was being overflowed through its outlet drainage system and no water was getting stored in her water reservoir tank although there was no leakage in her water supply system. She lodged complaint with O.P. no. 1 on 18-01-2013 being the complaint no. 498690. And one servicing  man was sent to her house to attend the problem by O.P. no. 1 after long seven days of her complaint. It was found that as the storage tank of the water purifier was being filled with water its auto cut of water supply system was not functioning and the said problem was solved for few days. But on 15-03-2013 the same problem again arose and complainant told O.P. no. 1 over phone but none came to attend the problem and on 25-03-2013 she lodged complaint being no. 517126 and on 28-03-2013, O.P. no. 1 sent one representative who himself, during servicing the said machine, admitted that he had no previous experience regarding the operational system of the said machine. As a result, the problem remained unsolved. It is further alleged by the complainant that a new problem also arose which compelled her to switch off the machine for most of the time without using the same. Again on 31-03-2013 complainant lodged another complaint being no. 519206 but O.P. no. 1 remained inactive without giving any post-sale service to the complainant. And due to heavy water drainage problem, complainant had to pay huge electricity bill since January, 2013. As per complainant it is completely a manufacturing defect and as the O.P. no. 1 did not redress her grievance, she was compelled to file this instant petition on 10-05-2013 praying for the aforesaid reliefs.    

3.                  Notices were served upon O.Ps. But none appeared nor filed any written

version.  Accordingly, the case was heard ex parte.

4.                  Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.                  Both the points are  taken up together for consideration.            Complainant filed her

petition sworn on affidavit along with all documents. After purchasing on 19-05-2012, the water purifier started giving trouble on and from 10-01-2013, i.e., only after six months. The machine, which cost such a big amount of  Rs. 27,000/-, is certainly expected to provide service without a defect at least for two years. And O.P. no. 1 sent a servicing man who does not have any experience about the machine, this is nothing but gross negligence about the duty on the part of the O.P. no. 1. And the machine was purchased from O.P. no. 3, and O.P. no. 3 did not even receive the notice of this Forum, O.P. no. 3 might have forgotten that their business is totally dependent on consumer satisfaction.  The entire purchase price was received by O.P. no. 3 and O.P no. 3 did not even care to appear before this Forum. From the attitude of the O.Ps., it is crystal clear that they have nothing to challenge the allegations of the complainant leveled against them. As a result, the averments of the complainants remained uncontroverted and we have no difficulty to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant. And we find that the O.Ps. are deficient in providing service towards the complainant.

      Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Accordingly, the case succeeds against O.Ps. with cost. 

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  146 of 2013 ( HDF 146 of 2013 )  be  allowed ex parte  with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      That the  O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to refund the purchase price of the water purifier being Rs. 27,000/- to the complainant.

      That complainant do get an award of Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost.

      The  o.ps. are further directed to pay the entire  amount of Rs. 32,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from this order, i.d., the entire amount shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till actual payment and the complainant is also directed to return the water purifier machine in question to the O.Ps. on receipt of the awarded amount from O.Ps. 

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 ( Jhumki Saha )                         ( P. K. Chatterjee )                (T.K. Bhattacharya  )

 Member,                                     Member,                                President,

 C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                     C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                 C.D.R.F.,Howrah