DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 05^th  day of September 2018 

Present  : Smt.Shiny.P.R,  President

                : Smt.Suma.K.P, Member

                : Sri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member     Date of Filing : 26/10/2017

 CC No.152/2017

S.Sureshkumar,

Working abroad,

S/o Sivashanmugham,

21/419, ‘Muthukulam’,

Archana Nagar,

Nurani (PO),

Palakkad Taluk & District,

678 004.

(By Adv.V.K.Venugopalan)                                                     -           Complainant

        Vs 

1. The Manager,

M/s EFFAR Trading,

31/942, BOC Road, Palakkad.

2. M/s Impex Ltd,

Represented by its Manager,

KCM Appliances Pvt, Ltd,

10/595 F,

Malikapeediaka, Alangad (PO),

Ernakulam District, Kerala – 685 511                                        -       Opposite parties

O R D E R

Order by Smt.Shiny.P.R, President.

Complaint in brief:

The complainant had purchased a brand new Impex LED TV (32”) from 1^st opposite party for an amount of Rs.14,950/- on 05.08.2017.  After the installation it worked only about 5 hours.  After that the screen started developing cracks.  Immediately the matter was informed to the 1^st opposite party by the complainant. Opposite party’s technicians attended the complaint on 07.08.2017. But they could not repair the TV.  Hence the complainant sent a notice on 19.08.2017 to the opposite parties to redress his grievances.  1^st opposite party replied for the same with untenable contentions.  2^nd opposite party did not sent any reply. 

Complainant further submitted that till date the opposite parties did not take any steps to redress his grievances.  He and his family had suffered great loss and inconvenience due to the supply of defective LED TV (32”).  Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing opposite parties  jointly and severally to replace the defective LED TV (32”) or return the price with interest at the rate of 18% and also to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony suffered by the complainant due to the indifferent attitude of the opposite parties along with cost of proceedings. 

Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to opposite parties. Opposite parties remained absent inspite of receipt of notice.  Hence they were called absent and set ex-parte.

Complainant filed chief affidavit and Exts. A1 to A3 were marked. Ext A2 was in series. Complainant filed IA 96/18 to appoint an expert commissioner to examine the TV and file detailed report. Application was allowed and commissioner was appointed.   Commissioner filed commission report stating that there were cracks in the TV panel/TFT (Thin Film Transistor) when the TV was put on mode.  Commissioner reported that LCD panels are made up of thin glass sheet and thin linear polarizing sheet a pasted on it, to enable to view the data.  The screen if cracked due to manufacturing defect or mal-functioning of components the defects noted herein can occur.  It may also be caused due to rough handling in shipping or transportation.  These sorts of cracks happening in the screen internally are commonly called thermal cracks which are normally due to defective internal components/parts.  The defect in the subject TV can only be viewed as manufacturing defect. Expert commissioner’s report was marked as Ext.C1.  Evidence was closed and the matter was heard.

Issues for consideration:-

1.    Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?

2.    If so, what is the relief and cost?

Issues 1 & 2

We have perused the affidavits and documents filed before the Forum. Ext.A1 proves that complainant has purchased the alleged TV on 05.08.2017. According to the expert, the above TV has manufacturing defect.  Opposite parties remained absent and there is no contra evidence to disprove the case of the complainant.  

Hence the complaint is allowed.

We direct 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs. 14,950/- (Rupees fourteen thousand nine hundred and fifty only) to the complainant being the price of the TV along with Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and also to pay Rs.4,500/- (Rupees four thousand five hundred only)  as cost of proceedings.  On payment of the ordered amount, opposite parties are at liberty to take back the TV from the complainant.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order till realization.  

Pronounced in the open court on this the 05^th  day of September 2018.

                                                                                                          Sd/-

                   Shiny.P.R

                   President 

                      Sd/-       

                   Suma.K.P

                    Member

                       Sd/-

    V.P.Anantha Narayanan

                   Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext.A1  -  Original tax invoice No.232 dated.05.08.2017 issued by 1^st opposite party to the

               Complainant

Ext.A2 series -  Photocopy of lawyer notice sent by the complainant to the opposite parties

                         dated.19.08.2017 with acknowledgement cards and postal receipts

Ext.A3  -  Original reply notice issued by opposite party to the complainant dated.27.09.2017

Ext.C1  -  Commission Report – report submitted by the expert commissioner

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

Nil

Witness examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Cost     Rs.4,500/-