PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

                       Dated this the 4^th day of October 2012

                                                                                 Filed on : 09/08/2012

Present :

          Shri. A  Rajesh,                                                     President.

Shri. Paul Gomez,                                                 Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma,                                           Member

C.C. No. 491/2012

     Between

Rajiv Dattani,                                    :         Complainant

H. No. 6/1214 E,                                    (party-in-person)

“Kailash”, Star theatre compound,

Mattancherry, Cochin-682 002.

                                                And

 1. The Manager,                             :         Opposite parties

     Videocon International Ltd.,                     (absent)

     Cheruparampath road,

     Kadavanthara,

     Cochin-682 020.

2.  The Manager,

Next Retail India Ltd.,

39/4782, Chakiat Chambers,

MG Road, Ravipuram,

Ernakulam, Cochin-16.

                                          O R D E R

A  Rajesh, President.

          The undisputed facts of the complainant’s case are as follows:

          The complainant purchased an LCD TV-32 from the 2^nd opposite party.  After 2 years the complainant found a minute thin vertical line on the top of the screen  but there was no problem with the  picture.  The complainant lodged a complaint with the 2^nd opposite party on 18-02-2012.  At their instruction a service personal examined the TV and said that  it was a panel problem.  He said that the cost of repairs approximately would be Rs. 8,000/- to 10,000/-.  Subsequently the complainant switched on the TV after the service personal left from the house, the TV was completely spoilt and the picture was not at all visible.  In spite of  repeated reminders to the opposite parties they  failed to redress the grievance of the complainant.  So the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties to repair the defects of the TV free of cost.

          2. In spite of service of notice from this Forum the 1^st opposite party remained absent for reasons of their own.  Service  of notice of 2^nd opposite party has not been completed.  No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant.   Exts. A1 and A2  were marked on his side.  Heard the complainant who appeared in person.

          3. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether  the complainant is entitled to get the TV repaired.

          4.  The complainant purchased an LCD TV from the 2^nd opposite party on 25-08-2009 at a price of Rs. 24,000/- evident from Ext. A1.  According to the complainant the service personal of the 1^st opposite party attended to a minor complaint  on the TV on

19-02-2011 and thereafter the same became defunct.  The complainant maintains that time and again the complainant requested the opposite parties to rectify the defect of the TV  which fell on deaf ears.  Ext. A2 series substantiate  the averments of the complainant.  Nothing is forthcoming on the part of the 1^st opposite party to controvert the allegations of the complainant. The  warranty period only assures the buyer that any defect shall be repaired forthwith.  But no where it is stated in law that the seller is not bound to attend to the genuine complaint of the buyer.  Here is a clue wherein so happened whereby the buyer has been to say the least laughed at which is status does not conform so which goes to ;means that the opposite party is squarely liable to redress the grievance of the complainant in time not causing him unnecessary delay in time and money.  The matter not having been restored so, the Forum is of the considered opinion that the opposite party shall repair the same free of cost satisfactorily failing the opposite party shall replace the T.V. with  a new one.   In that view of the matter  the complainant is entitled to get the TV repaired free of cost.

          5.  In the result, we allow  the complaint and direct that the 1^st opposite party shall forthwith repair the TV and deliver in working condition to the satisfaction of the complainant failing which the 1^st opposite party is liable to replace the same with a new one of the same price.

          The above said order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.             

                    Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 4^th day of October 2012

                                                                        Sd/- A Rajesh, President.

                                                          Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member

                                                          Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

                                                                   Forwarded/By Order,

                                                                   Senior Superintendent.

                                        Appendix

Complainant’s exhibits :

                   Ext.   A1     :         Copy of statement

                             A2     :         Copy of gmail dt. 20-04-2012

 Opposite party’s Exhibits :        :         Nil