Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/12/4

A.Prasanth - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, Global Sports - Opp.Party(s)

21 Apr 2012

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/12/4
 
1. A.Prasanth
S/o.C.N.Prakashan Nair(L)Kovval House, Kanhangad South
Kasaragod
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Proprietor, Global Sports
Opp. Bus Stand, Main Road, Kanhangad. 671315
Kasaragod
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE K.T.Sidhiq PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G. MEMBER
 HONORABLE P.Ramadevi Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

 

 

D.of.F:17/6/2011

D. of O: 21/4/2012

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                       CC.NO.4/2012

                           Dated this, the 21 st day of April 2012

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                       : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                 : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                                    : MEMBER 

 

A.Prashanth,

S/o C.N Prakashan Nair(L),

Kovval House, Kanhangad South.     : Complainant

(in person)

 

The Proprietor,

Global Sports, Opp. Busstand,          : Opposite party

Main Road,Kanhangad.

(Adv.K.M.Basheer,Hosdurg)

 

                                                        ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ      : PRESIDENT

 

       Bereft of unnecessaries the  case of complainant is as follows:

 Complainant purchased a badminton racket from the shop of opposite party.  Opposite party made the complainant believe that ‘Vixen ‘racket is of superior quality and it is free from defects.  Believing opposite party complainant purchased a vixen badminton racket for  Rs.1700/- from opposite party.  As a practice among shuttle badminton players the complainant    has also given the badminton racket to put new strings since even the most reputed companies won’t give warranty for the strings.  But after putting the strings from the sports shop a bend occurred to the racket due to the defects of the racket. Had the racket been superior quality it would not have bent while tightening the strings.  The complainant purchased the said racket believing the representation that the racket is of superior quality.

 

2.   According to opposite party the Vixen racket is a superior quality racket in his experience.  The vixen company is not offering any guarantee to their racket.  The Vixen company is not made a party to these proceedings.  Hence the complaint is not maintainable.  Further the bill produced by the complainant does not contain the date.  Hence they cannot say when the complainant purchased the racket.  Therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.   Complainant adduced evidence.  Exts.A1 to A3 and MO1 produced and marked.  Opposite party has not adduced oral or documentary evidence.  Both sides heard.  Documents perused.

 

4.  The complainant as PW1 deposed that  opposite party made  him believe that  Vixen rackets are superior quality and since it has  ordinary  strings he entrusted  the racket for changing  its strings to BG 65.  But after putting the strings when the racket is taken out of the machine, it became bent.  So he approached opposite party next day and he was asked to come on the next day  and after 3 consecutive  visits, opposite party refused to replace the racket.

 

5.  It is the contention of opposite party that manufacturer of the racket is not made a party and therefore the complaint is bad for non joinder of manufacturer.

   The contention of the opposite party is not sustainable.  The dealer of a product is the  front man as  far as the consumer is concerned and privity of  contract is between the customer and the dealer.  It is nowhere provided either in the Act or the rules framed,  there under that whenever a trader is proceeded against under the Consumer Protection Act, original manufacturer of the goods must be also be traced and made as a necessary party.  It is well settled that a necessary party is that in whose absence court cannot pass an effective order.

 

7.    Further it is not the case of the complainant that he approached opposite party to purchase a racket manufactured by Vixen company.  According to PW1 he purchased Vixen racket since the opposite party made him believe that Vixen racket is superior quality.  Therefore being the front man of the consumer, the dealer i.e. the opposite party cannot wash his hands putting blame on the manufacturer.  Opposite party  being a dealer should have taken proper care to sell good quality products rather than sub standard products for a comparatively higher price. Any product put for sale should provide a minimum guarantee irrespective of any express guarantee or warranty.  In other words   a product put for sale without any guarantee or warranty does not mean that the dealer can sell useless goods or immediately perishable goods for a higher price.

 

8.  Therefore we hold that opposite party committed unfair trade practice and hence he is liable to compensate the complainant.

 

         In the result complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to return the purchase price of the racket Rs.1700/- with a compensation of 1000/- and a cost of Rs.2000/-.  Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.  Failing which Rs.1700/- will carry interest @12% per annum from the date of complaint till payment.  Had the opposite party got a case that it is the manufacturer who is liable to pay the amount then opposite party can recover the said amount from the manufacturer of   Vixen racket through appropriate proceedings after complying this order.  Complainant is directed to take back the racket from the  Forum and return it to the opposite party on receiving the amount as per this order.

Exts:

A1-Sale Bill

A2-13/10/11- Lawyer notice

A3-postal acknowledgment

MO1-  badminton racket -

 

MEMBER                                            MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT                       

eva

 

 

 
 
[HONORABLE K.T.Sidhiq]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G.]
MEMBER
 
[HONORABLE P.Ramadevi]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.