Smt. Ruby Rani Kundu filed a consumer case on 21 Feb 2018 against The Manager, Stufa Manufacturin Enterprises in the Rayagada Consumer Court. The case no is CC/156/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 20 Mar 2018.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,
STATE: ODISHA.
C.C. Case No. 156 / 2017. Date. 21 .2. 2018.
P R E S E N T .
Dr. Aswini Kumar Mohapatra, President
Sri GadadharaSahu, . Member.
Smt. Padmalaya Mishra, Member
Smt. Ruby Rani Kundu, C/O: Dr. Nava Kishore Kundu, New colony, Near Jagannath complex,
Po/ Dist.Rayagada,State: Odisha. Cell No. 9438171700. …….Complainant
Vrs.
1.The Manager, Home shop-18, 7th. Floor, FC-24, Sector-16A, Filmcity, Noida-201301 Utterpradesh.
2.The Manager, Stufa Manufacturing Enterprises, H-14, Udyog Nagar, Industrial Area, Rohatak Road, New Delhi- 110041.
3.The Manager, Stufa Manufacturing Enterprises, Khasra No. 421, VIII, Naryal, Sector-4, Dist: Solan, Parwanoo-173220, Himachalpradesh(India). .…..Opp.Parties
Counsel for the parties:
For the complainant: - Self.
For the O.P No.1 :- Set exparte.
For the O.Ps 2 &3:- Written version sent through postal service.
J u d g e m e n t.
The present disputes emerges out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service against afore mentioned O.Ps for non replacement of Surya Flame 3 burner cooktop. The brief facts of the case are summaried here under.
That the complainant had purchased a Surya Flame 3 burner cooktop (33455703 ) from the O.P. No.1 on Dt.20.04.2016 through on line purchase i.e. Homeshop 18 on payment of amount a sum of Rs.3,798/- vide Invoice No.STUF/16-17/00266. The O.P. No.1 sold the said set to the complainant providing one year warranty period. The above set found defective within warranty period and it was damaged and rapidly contacted to the O.Ps. for replacement. Inspite of repeated approaches to the O.Ps no one sort out to replace the same with a new defective free set. Hence this case. The complainant prays the forum direct the O.Ps to replace or refund purchase price of the Surya Flame 3 burner cooktop to the complainant interalia to pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses.
On being noticed the O.P No. 1 neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their written version inspite of more than 03 adjournments has been given to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.P No.1. Observing lapses of around 3 months for which the objectives of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant. Hence after hearing the counsel for the complainant set the case exparte against the O.P. No.1 . The action of the O.P No.1 is against the principles of natural justice as envisaged under section 13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.P. ‘No.1 set exparte as the statutory period for filing of written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.
On being noticed the O.Ps 2 & 3 field written version in shape of postal service and submitted that we have already replaced the defective set with a new one along with fresh bill had sent to the complainant directly through courier service. Hence the O.P. 2 & 3 prays the forum to close the against the O.Ps 2 & 3.
Heard from the parties. Perused the record, written version filed by the parties.
FINDINGS.
On perusal of the record it is revealed that after receipt of the notice from this forum the O.Ps 2 & 3 promptly replaced the defective set with a new one along with fresh bill had sent to the complainant directly through courier service.
During the course of hearing the complainant is present in person before the forum and submitted that she has received the new Surya Flame 3 burner cooktop in place of defective one. The complainant further submitted that on perusal of the bill she found that actually she paid Rs. 3,798/- to the O.P No.1 during purchase date on Dt. 20.4.2016 , but she was received bill for Rs.1,947/-. On asking by the complainant to the O.P. No. 2 & 3 over telephone he replied the differential amount will be paid to you by the O.P. No.1. So the complainant prays the forum direct the O.P. No.1 to refund the differential amount a sum of Rs.1,851/- which she is entitled.
As the O.P. No.1 set exparte we passed order accordingly on the available record in this forum.
On perusal of the complaint petition this forum found that actually the complainant had paid Rs.3,798/- to the O.P. No.1 towards purchase of Surya Flame 3 burner cooktop (33455703 ) vide Invoice No.STUF/16-17/00266 on Dt.20.04.2016 through on line purchase. When the O.P.No. 2 & 3 had replaced the above set and sent bill bearing invoice No. 2577 during the month of December, 2017 an amount of Rs. 1,947/-. This forum observed the case in hand the complainant is entitled to receive differential amount a sum of Rs. 1,851/- from the O.P. No.1 as established in documentary evidence.
To the meet the ends of justice the following order is passed.
ORDER.
In resultant the complainant petition is hereby allowed in part against the O.P. No.1 and dismissed against the O.Ps No. 2 & 3.
The O.P. No.1 is ordered to refund balance amount a sum of Rs.1,851/- inter alia to pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and litigation expenses.
The above direction is to be complied by the O.P No.1 with in one month from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties free of charge.
Dictated and corrected by me
Pronounced on this 21st. day of February, 2018.
MEMBER. MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.