BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA YSR DISTRICT
PRESENT SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., PRESIDENT FAC
SRI M.V.R. SHARMA, MEMBER.
Friday, 4th July 2014
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 98/ 2013
Dr. V. Venkateswarachari, S/o V. Ramasubbaiahchari,
aged 58 years, D.No. 10/564, Bellammandi Veedhi,
Near Vinayaka Temple, Kadapa – 516 001. Complainant.
Vs.
The Proprietor, Samsung, K.G.N.Digital Plaza,
21/314, S.F.S Street, Beside Gokul lodge,
Kadapa – 516 001. Respondent.
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 25-6-2014 in the presence of complainant as in person and Sri C. Vijaya Prasad, Advocate for respondent and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, President FAC),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 of C.P. Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- The complainant had purchased a Samsung 5X,PL20 SN 8295C90BB00468R camera for Rs. 6,200/-, dt. 3-1-2012 from the respondent shop. The Samsung KGN Digital Plaza, D.No. 21/314, S.F.S Street, Beside Gokul lodge, Kadapa. The camera was not working properly, after purchase. There is no clarity in the photos. The complainant went to the respondent shop and explained the defect of the camera. The complainant asked for a good quality camera but the respondent replied that we are helpless for clarity of photos. We cannot do anything. The complainant went so many times to the respondent shop and explained about the defect that on the screen of the camera, there is a black colour. The respondents replied that they were helpless and the respondents said that they have send the camera to Vijayawada for servicing. As the complainant working as teacher, he suffered a lot to go many times to the respondent shop. The complaint felt much mental agony for response replies of the respondents. The complainant’s camera was with the respondent the bills and receipts are with the complainant.
3. As the respondent shop is situated at Kadapa and the complainant comes under the purview of this Hon’ble forum. So the complaint filed by the complainant. A postal order of Rs. 100/- is paid on 19-2-2013
4. Therefore, the complainant prays the Hon’ble forum (a) to replace with new one camera in place of defect camera or pay Rs. 6,200/- towards cost of the camera to the complainant, for the loss of leave to the complainant and for mental agony, (b) The complainant prays the Hon’ble forum to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony (c) The complainant prays the Hon’ble forum to pay Rs. 5,000/- towards cost.
5. Counter field by the respondent. The complaint filed by the complainant is neither just nor maintainable either in law or on fact so the case.
6. This respondent puts the complainant to strict proof of the allegations averred in the complaint those which are not specifically admitted hereunder.
7. This respondent taking preliminary objection over maintainability of the present complaint as this is hit by non-joinder of necessary party of manufacturer as well as company authorized service center as this respondent is only retailer of Samsung company products.
8. It is submitted that the allegations averred in the complaint that, the camera purchased by the complainant has not working properly and even if it works the output of photographs are not properly came out is utterly false allegations and thus this respondent has denied the same.
9. Further it is submitted that, the allegations that, there is a black scar on the camera screen is another travesty of truth as the complainant has brought the subject camera with broken screen condition and on that this respondent has directed the complainant to take the subject camera to the company authorized service center at Kadapa and in turn the same also informed to the service center as this respondent is only company retailer at Kadapa. With owe a duty the servicing center has rectified the defect and return the subject camera with condition and in turn the complainant is also signed stating that I have received the equipment in satisfactory working condition with authorized service center and taken away the subject matter camera. Thus the allegation levied by the complainant that, the subject matter camera is with this respondent is another blatant lie generated for unlawful gain purpose. Hence, the present complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party of Samsung Company as well as it authorized service center at Kadapa.
10. Under these circumstances, this respondent submits that, the complainant has approached with un-clear hands which is not maintainable in eye of law.
11. It is humbly submits that, as this respondent is only a retailer to the Samsung company at Kadapa and even if any defects occurred in the equipment it is the duty of the company alone as this respondent is not a manufacturer and thus there is no deficiency of service on the part of this respondent. Therefore, it is prayed that the Hon’ble forum may be pleased to dismiss the present case with costs in the interest of justice.
12. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether the complainant is eligible for compensation as prayed by the complainant?
- Whether there is negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the Respondent?
- To what relief?
13. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A6 were marked and on behalf of the respondents Ex. B1 was marked.
14. Point Nos. 1 & 2. It is true that the complainant had purchased a Samsung Camera 5X,PL20 SN 8295C90BB00468R camera for Rs. 6,200/-, dt. 3-1-2012 from the respondent shop under Ex. A1. As per complaint the camera was not working properly and in complaint the complainant stated that the camera was with the respondent, but in the open forum the complainant said that the camera was with him. Ex. A2 is the notice given by the complainant to the respondent. Ex. A3 is the postal receipt. Ex. A4 is the receipt of Samsung authorized service center, where the complainant had given camera for servicing. As seen from the evidence on record, when handling the camera there will be some techniques before going to handle with the camera. We should know about handling of camera and the complainant is well educated teacher, should know about handling of the camera. Ex. A6 is the photos filed by the complainant are not clear. There is no clarity in the photographs. As per Ex. A4 & B1 it is very clear that the complainant had given camera at service station on some defect. So from the above observation there is some defect in the camera. So there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. At the same time the complainant is eligible for compensation as prayed by him.
15. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the respondent to replace the new camera in the place of the defective camera, after taking back the defective camera from the complainant, pay Rs. 1,000/- towards mental agony and pay Rs. 1,000/- towards cost of the complaint, to the complainant, within 45 days of date of receipt of orders.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 4th July 2014
MEMBER PRESIDENT FAC
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant NIL For Respondents : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant : -
Ex. A1 Original cash bill from Samsung K.G.N. Digital plaza, dt. 3-01-2012.
Ex. A2 P/c of notice dt. 3-2-2013.
Ex. A3 Original postal receipt.
Ex. A4 Camera receipt issued by the respondent.
Ex. A5 Warranty card.
Ex. A6 Two original photos.
Exhibits marked for Respondents: -
Ex. B1 Attested copy of job card of Samsung India Electronics Ltd., its authorized service center i.e. M/s Sravani Electronics, Kadapa.
MEMBER PRESIDENT FAC
Copy to :-
- Dr. V. Venkateswarachari, S/o V. Ramasubbaiahchari,
D.No. 10/564, Bellammandi Veedhi,
- Sri C. Vijaya Prasad, Advocate for respondent.
B.V.P.
