In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   360 / 2010.

1)                   Sri Parthasakha Nandi,

27/5, Biren Roy Road (East),

Madan Mohan Talla, Kolkata-700008.                                                      ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   The Manager, M/s. Great Eastern Trading Co. ,

20, Old Court House Street, Kolkata-700001.

2)                   Mr. Sandip Paul, M/s. Care Electronics Service Centre,

Authorised Philips Service Centre,

48, Southern Avenue, Kolkata-700029.

3)                   The General Manager, Philips Electronics India Ltd.,

2, Heysham Road, and also known as

7, Justice Chandra Madhab Road, Kolkata-700020.                                 ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Smt. Jhumki Saha, Member.

                        Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member

Order No.    1 6   Dated  2 9 / 0 2 / 2 0 1 2 .

Complainant Sri Parthasakha Nandi, by filing a petition u/s 12 of the C.P. act, 1986 has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to replace the TV set in question by a new one or to return the price of the TV amounting to Rs.9800/- with interest upto date @ 24% and to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing harassment and mental agony as the complainant could not enjoy the service of the said TV set.

            Since the purchase of the TV set at an amount of Rs.9800/- from o.p. no.1 on 10.8.09 of ‘Philips’ brand vide annex-A. The said TV set was giving trouble including some defects of pictures etc. On advice of o.p. no.1 who was informed about the problem by complainant, complainant lodged complaint to o.p. no.2 being the authorized service centre of o.p. nos.1 and 3. But o.p. no.1 did not do much to resolve the matter from their end. At the instruction of o.p. no.1, o.p. no.2 came to complainant’s residence and took the TV set in running condition for repairing on 14.8.10 vide annex-B. And after few days o.p. no.2 again came to complainant’s house to return the TV set. But complainant found that it became more problematic and damaged that the earlier condition and he refused to accept the same. Thereafter telephonic discussion took place between the complainant and o.p. no.2. And finally on 22.9.10, o.p. no.2 wrote a letter to complainant asking him to take his TV set within 10 days from that date, vide annex-C. And the letter was received by the complainant on 26.9.10. The complainant further stated that he purchased the said TV set for passing time and enjoyment of his old and ailing mother. And with the defective TV set, all his family members got frustrated and they did not want to take back the same set from o.p. no.2. Again o.p. nos.1 and 3 also remained very much silent as to their duties and liabilities. And finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps. with the aforesaid prayers. Notices were served upon o.ps. Only o.p. no.3 once appeared and filed vokalatnama but no w/v was filed on behalf of either of the o.ps. Accordingly, the case was heard ex parte.

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the petition of complaint, evidence and documents on record filed by complainant and noted their contents. After paying an amount of rs.9800/- to purchase TV set of such a world famous brand ‘Philips’ it is not at all expected that it would give trouble of any king since purchase. Even after receiving the notices from the Forum o.ps. did not file their w/v to controvert the allegations labeled against them by the complainant. Hence, there is no difficulty to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant which clearly shows the level of negligence of o.ps. towards the complainant. Accordingly, we hold o.ps. to be deficient in service. And the case succeeds on merit with costs against o.ps.

            Hence, ordered,

            That o.ps. are jointly and severally directed to replace the TV set in question with a same model of same price with same features. If it is not available, they are directed to refund the price of the TV set being Rs.9800/- (Rupees nine thousand eight hundred) only. They are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only as compensation and Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only as litigation cost. The o.ps. are directed to comply with the order within 45 days i.d. Rs.50/- (Rupees fifty) only per day shall be charged till full compliance.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

   ____Sd-________              ______Sd-________             ______x________

     MEMBER                            MEMBER                        PRESIDENT