<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> By ADV. RAVI SHUSHA, MEMBER.<br /> <br /> The complainant has filed this complaint for getting a direction to the opp.party to replace the damaged and used wireless telephone set with a new one or to get his full amount paid as installation charge and cost of new telephone set and compensation.<br /> <br /> The brief of averment in the complaint is as follows:<br /> <br /> The complainant had applied for one cordless telephone connection of the opp.party and had paid Rs.1800/- as installation charge and cost of new telephone set on 23.2.2005. The telephone set installed by the opp.party was substandard and a used one. It was not functioning properly also. The complainant had approached the opp.party sever times for the replacement of the above system. But all his effort was in vain. Hence filed this complaint for getting relief.<br /> <br /> <br /> Opp.party filed version contending that the complainant applied for a land phone connection and Rs.1,800/- paid as connection charges on 23.2.2005. The pghone set was not a sub-standard or used one as alleged therein. The mobile phone set was a brand new one and it was displayed and operated by the agent of the opp.party in the presence of the complainant. The complainant was convinced and satisfied and had taken the phone only on his satisfaction. After one week the complainant had approached the opp.party and demanded another model in place of the phone which he was using. The opp.party had offered a new model on the condition that the difference in value has to be paid by the complainant. But the complainant was not willing to accept that offer and he returned. The complainant is trying to compel and pressurize the opp.party to render a new model phone in place of the phone he is using . Hence the complainant is not entitled to make such claims.<br /> <br /> <br /> The point that would arise for consideration are:<br /> <br /> [I] Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties.<br /> [ii] Reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> For the complainant . PW.1 is examined and Ext.P1 to P5 are marked.<br /> For the opp.party DW.1 is examined.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Points [I] & [ii]<br /> <br /> <br /> According to the complainant, the telephone set installed lby the opp.party was substandard and a used one. It was not functioning properly. The complainant had approached the opp.party several times for the replacement but all his effect was in vain. For proving these contentions the complainant has not produced any materials worth believable to show that he has filed any application seeking a replacement of the installed telephone set. There is only a vague statement that he had approached the opp.party on several occasions. Opp.party’s contention is that after one week the complainant had approached the opp.party and demanded another model in place of the phone which he was using and for a new model the difference in value has to be paid by the complainant. For that proposal the complainant was not willing. The crucial question to be decided is that whether the installed telephone was substandard and a used one. For that also there is no expert opinion showing that the installed telephone was substandard and a used one. As there is no evidence about the installed telephone was substandard and a used one , the opp.party is held in no way responsible and liable. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party in this matter. The complainant is entitled to no relief at all. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> In the result the complaint fails and is dismissed without cost.<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I N D E X<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the complainant <br /> PW.1. – Hari.<br /> <br /> List of documents for the complainant<br /> P1. – Receipt dt. 23.2.2005<br /> P2. – Copy of advocate notice dt. 9.3.2005<br /> P3. – Postal receipt<br /> P4. – Acknowledgement card.<br /> P5. – Advertisement.<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the opp.party<br /> DW.1. Raja Raja Varma.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />