DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C.C. No. 207/2021
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
15.09.2021 12.11.2021 15.06.2022
Complainant/s:- | Mofijul Mondal, S/o Anaru Mondal, Residing at Sellampur, P.O. – Sewli Telenipara, P.S. – Titagarh, District – North 24 Parganas, Kolkata – 700 121. = Vs = |
Opposite Party/s:- | - The Manager, Whirlpool of India Limited, having corporate office at Plot No. 40, Sector 44, P.O. – Gurgaon, P.S. – Chakkarpur, Pin – 122002.
- The Manager, Raipur Electronics Private Limited, having office at 13 (10/A), S. N. Banerjee Road, Barackpore, P.O. – Barrackpore Bazar, P.S. – Barrackpore, District – North 24 Parganas, Kolkata – 700 120.
|
P R E S E N T :- Shri Debasis Mukhopadhyay…………President.
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.
JUDGMENT/FINAL ORDER
This is a complaint U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The Complainant stated that he purchased a Whirlpool refrigerator produced by O.P. No. 1 from the O.P. No. 2 on 13/04/2021 and O.P. No. 2 received Rs. 18,800/- from the Complainant. Since delivery it has been found to be a defective refrigerator and the Complainant informed O.P. No. 2 and on 16/04/2021 a person from service centre of O.P. No. 1 inspected the defected refrigerator and assured that the defective refrigerator will be replaced by a new one on the money will be refunded to the Complainant. But there was no response yet despite several verbal communications by the Complainant.
Then on 03/07/2021 the Complainant received a message for further assistance but thereafter no person visited the Complainant regarding the grievances. From the act and conduct of O.Ps it was evident that they were negligent and deficient of service and also guilty of unfair trade practice. Hence, the Complainant filed this case praying for a direction to the Opposite Parties to replace the defective refrigerator or to refund the amount of Rs. 18,300/- and also for cost and compensation.
The Opposite Parties did not appear to contest the case and hence the case was heard ex-parte.
The Complainant submitted his examination-in-chief on affidavit to prove the case. The Complainant also filed documents regarding the purchase of the refrigerator and also copy Advocate’s letter regarding the complaint to the Opposite Parties.
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submitted that the Complainant has proved his case on oath and the Opposite Parties did not take any steps to file their version regarding the complaint of the Complainant and therefore the Complainant’s case is proved and the O.Ps are to be directed as per prayers of the Complainant.
Contd. To Page No. 2 . . . .
: : 2 : :
C.C. No. 207/2021
Considering the facts and the circumstances of the case and the evidence of the Complainant it is found that the Complainant has proved his case on oath as per his evidence-in-chief and there is no evidence to the contrary to disbelieve the Complainant’s case.
In absence of any evidence by the Opposite Parties contradicting the evidence of the Complainant we find that the Complainant’s case is proved ex-parte and the Complainant is entitled to get the decree as prayed for.
Hence,
It is Ordered,
That the case C.C./207/2021 be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the Opposite Parties.
The Opposite Parties are directed to replace the defective refrigerator to the Complainant within 02 months from this date or alternatively refund the amount of Rs. 18,300/- along with 6% interest there on from the date of filing of this case till payment within 02 months from this date failing which the Complainant is at liberty to execute the decree according to law.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.
Dictated & Corrected by me
President
President
Member
