Kerala

Kollam

CC/07/359

Dileepkumar.S, Sreedhar Vilas, Kottiyam, Kollam - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, Quilon Radios, Visalakshi Mansion, Main Road, Kollam - Opp.Party(s)

Nisa Fasil

30 Aug 2008

ORDER


C.D.R.F. KOLLAM : CIVIL STATION - 691013
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::: KOLLAM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/07/359

Dileepkumar.S, Sreedhar Vilas, Kottiyam, Kollam
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Proprietor, Quilon Radios, Visalakshi Mansion, Main Road, Kollam
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President 2. RAVI SUSHA : Member 3. VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

By R. VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER. The complaint is filed for getting an order directing opp.parties to repair the PVG Excel Super Grinder of the Complainant and compensation and cost. The avernments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows. The Complainant had purchased a PVG Excel Super Grinder from opposite party concern as per invoice No. BC 0659 dated 16.08.2003 for Rs.3,250. The product is warranted for 5 years. On 27.08.2007 the Grinder was damaged and as it was happened within the warranty period Complainant approached opposite party for repair of Grinder. Opposite party repaired the Grinder but the staff of opposite party demanded repair charges. The Complainant submitted that the repair will come under warranty conditions, the staff of opposite party abused him and misbehaved with him. The act of opposite party will amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Complainant sent a legal notice for this context, opposite party accepted the notice but not replied. Hence the Complainant filed the complaint. The opposite parties remained absent. Hence set exparte. The points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. 2. Compensation and cost. The Complainant filed affidavit. Exhibits P1 to P4 were marked. As the opposite party remained absent, we are constrained to relay upon the evidence adduced by the Complainant. The Complainant could prove his case through complaint, Affidavit and Exhibits. On perusal of documents we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. The points found accordingly. There fore the complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to repair the PVG Excel Super Grinder of the Complainant and to pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and 1,500 as cost. The order is to complied with within one month of the date of the receipt of this order. Dated this the 30th August, 2008 INDEX List of witness for the complainant PW1 : Dileep Kumar Ext. P1: Invoice Ext. P2: Instruction manual Ext. P3: Job card Ext. P4: Advocate Notice




......................K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President
......................RAVI SUSHA : Member
......................VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member