D.o.F:04/10/2011

D.o.O:15/12/11

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                      CC253/11

                   Dated this, the 15th    day of December 2011.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                  : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                              : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G.                                : MEMBER 

A.Sreenivasan, S/o P.Krishnan,

R/at Thadiyanvalappu,

Kanhiradukkam Po, Hosdurg, Kasaragod.           : Complainant

(Adv.Muralee Krishna S,Hosdurg)

The Proprietor,

Excellent Electronics,                                             : Opposite party

Kovvalpally, Kanhangad, Po, Hosdurg

(in person)

                                                       ORDER

SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER

      Mr.Sreenivasan filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service against  the opposite party, the proprietor Excellent Electronics.

   The complainant given to his TV Heir  for repair to opposite party in the month of August 2011 and he paid  1040/-.  After its repair the complainant used the TV  only two days and the complaint again occurred. The complainant informed  the fact to him and the opposite party ‘man had taken the circuit board for repair.  But the opposite party  failed to repair the television irrespective of several  request.  So the complainant have missed programmes  in the  television.  So far the opposite party did not repair the TV.  Hence this complaint is filed for necessary reliefs.

2.    On receipt of notice from this  Forum opposite party appeared before the Forum and orally agrees to repair  the TV replacing its IC.  Hence the  case is posted to adalath for settlement.  But the opposite party was absent in the adalath and after that he has not turned up and has not filed his version.  Hence the case is proceeded only with the complainant.

3.  The complainant had filed  Affidavit and Exts.A1 to A3 documents marked.  Ext.A1 is the receipt issued by the opposite party .  Ext.A2 is the copy of the lawyer notice asking the complaint to repair the TV and Ext.A3 is the unserved lawyer notice.  Heard the counsel for the complainant.

4. The issues raised in this case for consideration are

1. Whether any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

2. If so what is the relief?    HerehhhhhhhHHhhHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh     hhhh      sssssssssssssssxx    

 5.  Here the opposite party admitted before the Forum that the circuit Board is with him and he agreed to repair the TV .  But he did not do so.  Here the opposite party first of all refused the lawyer notice Ext.A3 sent by the complainant.  2ndly he submitted before the Forum that  he agreed to repair the TV.  Even then the opposite party didn’t do so.  That itself shows  the negligent  attitude of the opposite party.  Moreover  he has taken the circuit board for repair in the month of August 2011 but so far the opposite party has not repaired the TV set.  Hence we are of the opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and thereby caused mental agony to the complainant.

   Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite party is directed to repair the TV set of the complainant in  to working condition  failing which the opposite party is directed to pay `5000/- being the price of the old TV set.  The opposite party is also directed to pay a cost of `2000/- to the complainant.  Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of  receipt of copy of the order.

Exts:

A1- receipt issued by the opposite party .

A2- copy of the lawyer notice

A3- unserved lawyer notice

 MEMBER                                               MEMBER                                    PRESIDENT

eva