CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.

Present

Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President

Smt. Bindhu M Thomas, Member

Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member

 

CC No.330/11

Thursday the 21^st day of June,2012

 

Petitioner                                              : Hameed,

                                                               Karechirayil House,

                                                               Naduvile village,

                                                               Vaikom Town, Kottayam Dt.

                                                               (Adv. K. Kuruvilla John)

 

                                                          Vs.

 

Opposite parties                                   : The Manager,

                                                               Aiswarya Electricals Home Applicances

                                                               Kalakkal Road, Vaikom,

                                                               Kottayam Dt.Pin 686 141.

                                                             2) The Manager,

                                                                  L.G.Electronics India Pvt Ltd

                                                                  (Regd Office) Plot No.51,

                                                                  Udyog Vihar, Surajpur-Kasana Road,

                                                                  Greater Noida, Uttarpradesh 201 303

                                               

                                                            .

 

            The case of the complainant presented on 15/12/11 is as follows.

            On 22-9-2009 the complainant purchased a L.G 21” Television set from the 1^st opposite party, which was manufactured by L.G. Electronics India Pvt.Ltd. for an amount of Rs.10,200/-. At the time of purchase the 1^st opposite party assured that the T.V set has no complaints and it works smoothly without any defects and has given 1 year warranty. The 1^st opposite party has given assurance to the complainant that if any defects occur during the warranty period, the defects will be rectified without delay. After 6 months from purchase, petitioner’s T.V set became defective and did not work properly. The picture and the sound from the T.V set were not clear and audible. On getting the complaint, 1^st opposite party directed a mechanic from his shop to repair the T.V set and the mechanic came to the house and many times tried to repair the T.V set. But the 1^st opposite party was not able to repair the T.V set. The matter was informed to the 2^nd opposite party on 8-8-2011, 6-9-2011 and 4-10-2011 in writing about the complaints and non functioning of the T.V set and requested to take necessary steps for rectify the complaints. On 28-6-11 as per the direction of the 1^st opposite party, a mechanic came to the complainant’s house and has taken the mother board in the T.V set. Even now, the mother board is in possession of the 1^st opposite party. On 19/10/11 complainant sent a lawyer’s notice to the 1^st opposite party requesting him to rectify the complaints of T.V set and make it functioning. The notice was received by 1^st opposite party and till this date 1^st opposite party was not able to rectify the complaints in the T.V set. Hence this complaint.

            The notices were served with opposite parties. But they did not appear and properly contest the case. Hence opposite parties set-expartee.

            The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents which are marked as

Exts. A1 to A11.

            Heard complainant. The case of the complainant is that T.V set became defective within a short period after purchase. According to him opposite party has not taken any steps to rectify the defects in the T.V set. Even after repeated demands and complaints made by the complainant the opposite party has not rectify the defect of T.V set within the period of warranty. The opposite parties have not contest the case properly even after accepting the notice from this forum. Hence we have no reasons to dis-believe the case of complainant. So we are of the opinion that the case of complainant is to be allowed. Both opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant.

            In the result the complaint is allowed as follows. 1) We direct the opposite parties to refund Rs.10,200/-(ie price of the T.V.set) to the complainant and pay Rs.2500/- as compensation for inconveniences and pay Rs.1500/- as costs of these proceedings. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the order is not complied within one month amount will carry interest @ 10% per annum from the date of order till realisation.

Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-

Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-

Smt. Bindhu M Thomas, Member                     Sd/-

 

 

Ext.A1-is the copy of purchase invoice dtd 22-9-09

Ext.A2-is the copy of warranty card

Ext.A3-is the copy of written letter dtd 8-8-11

Ext.A4-is the postal receipt dtd 9-8-11

Ext.A5-is the copy of written letter dtd 6/9/11

Ext.A6-is the postal receipt dtd 12/9/11

Ext.A7-is the copy of written letter dtd 4-10-11

Ext.A8-is the postal receipt dtd 4-10-11

Ext.A9-is the copy of lawyer notice dt 19-10-11

Ext.A10-is the postal receipt dtd 19-10-11

Ext.A11-is the postal acknowledgement card

 

By Order,