CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Present
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC No. 108/2011
Friday, the 21st day of October, 2011
Petitioner : Faizal Muhammed,
Proprietor,
Vazhemadathil Jewellers,
Thalayolaparambu P.O
Kottayam.
(By Adv. Avaneesh V.N)
Vs.
Opposite party : The Proprietor,
Standard Neon Industries,
30/119 A, Vattekunnam,
Edappally North,
Cochin – 24.
O R D E R
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President
Case of the petitioner filed on 4..5..2011 is as follows.
Petitioner is running Jewelery shop at Thalayolaparambu in the name and style as Vazhemadathil Jewelers . According to the petitioner he is conducting the business concern as a means of his livelihood. In January 2010, attracted by the advertising of the opposite party, petitioner entrusted the business of manufacturing and installation of Neon display board at the business premises of the petitioner. On 2..2..2010 opposite party gave a quotation describing the works to the petitioner for fixing neon display board. Cost of the work was estimated as Rs. 55,000/- Opposite party agreed free replacement guarantee against manufacturing defect for two years. It was also agreed that formalities of the electrical inspectorate for obtaining the sanction will be done by the opposite party. According to the petitioner in approval of the quotation opposite party carried out the work. Initially there was no complaint subsequently some problems were started with regard to the Neon
-2-
lights. Matter was intimated to the respondent. But opposite party has not cure the defects hence the petition.
Notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party has no tendered appearance and filed any version so opposite party is set ex-parte.
Points for determinations are:
i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
ii) Relief and costs?
Evidence in this case consists of proof affidavit filed by the petitioner and Ext. A1 document.
Point No. 1
Crux of the case of the petitioner is that opposite party has not offered the service of installation of display board as promised. Even though opposite party offered replacement guarantee for two years for the manufacturing defect but on intimation, with regard to the defects, opposite party has not cared to cure defects. Further, more opposite party has not done the formalities at the electrical inspectorate for obtaining the sanction as offered. Without any contra evidence we constrain to rely on the sworn proof affidavit filed by the petitioner. In our view act of the opposite party amount to clear deficiency in service. So, point No. 1 is found accordingly.
Point No. 2
In view of the finding in point No. 1 petition is allowed. In the result opposite party is ordered to replace defective Neon sign board with defect free new Neon board to the satisfaction of the petitioner. If not possible opposite party is liable to refund Rs. 55,000/- to the petitioner. Opposite party
-3-
is ordered to pay an amount of Rs. 2,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation costs. Order shall be complied with within one month from the date of the copy of this order. If not complied as directed petitioner is entitled for 9% interest for the award amount from the date of order till realization.
compensation is ordered.
Dictated by me, transcribed by the Confidential Assistant, corrected by me and
pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 21st day of October , 2011.
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Sd/-
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/-
APPENDIX
Documents for the petitioner:
Ext. A1: Copy of quotation for supply of Neon sign board Dtd:
2..2..2010.
Documents for the opposite party
Nil.
By Order,
Senior Superintendent
