DISTRICT FORUM :: KADAPA
PRESENT: SMT. B. DURGA KUMARI, B.A. B.L., MEMBER.
SRI S. ABDUL KHADER BASHA, B.Sc., MEMBER
Thursday, 10th April 2008
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 27 / 2008.
Dr. B. Ramachandraiah,
C/o Pragathi Orthopaedic and General Hospital,
Opp. To RTC Bus Stand, Kadapa. ….. Complainant.
Vs.
The Proprietor, Sri Maruthi Trading Corporation,
D.No. 19/239, Madras Road, Municipal Stall No. 1,
Kadapa City and District, A.P. ….. Respondents.
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 8-4-2008 in the presence of Sri B. Siva Prasad Reddy, Advocate for complainant and respondent appeared as in person and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Sri S. Abdul Khader Basha, Member),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 of the C. P. Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- The complainant is a resident of Kadapa city working as Consultant on call in Pragathi Orthopedic and General Hospital and the Respondent is the owner of Sri Maruthi trading Corporation, Kadapa. The complainant purchased one Geyser Element for Rs. 190/- from the respondent shop vide the bill No. 2430 dt. 2-8-2007, which is having a guarantee period of one year from the date of purchase. After sale of it on 2-8-2007 the guarantee card too was filled stamped and signed by the respondent and given to complainant immediately. The complainant took the item to hospital and got it installed by the electrician on 3-8-2007. The said electrician is experienced technician and followed all operating instructions mentioned on the guarantee card. On checking he found that it is unserviceable, hence, he advised the complainant to get it replaced from the respondent. On that the complainant went to the respondent with the said item and asked for replacement on 4-8-2007. Then the respondent asked the complainant to produce the bill and guarantee card. As he had not brought them, he went back to home and searched for the said bill and guarantee card which he kept some where in the book shelves. He informed the same to the respondent and requested for replacement of the item. But the respondent refused saying that without the guarantee card and bill it is not possible to replace the item. Hence, the complainant kept quiet. After some time i.e. in the last week of November, while taking out some books he found the bill and guarantee card. Immediately he approached the respondent on 29-11-2007 for the replacement of the item with the bill & guarantee card. Even then the respondent refused to replace it and said to him unwanted and unparliamentarily words. The respondent said to complainant that “Being a doctor you are running for the replacement of item worth of Rs. 190/-, don’t you fell ashamed”. This is uncalled for and hurt the complainant deeply. On above incident the complainant got issued a legal notice dt. 13-12-2007 to the respondent and the same was received by the respondent on 18-1-2007. The respondent kept quiet and failed to give reply even till today. This clearly proves the deficiency of service on the part of the respondent. The complainant prayed the Hon’ble Forum be pleased to allow the complaint and pass orders in favour of the complainant, directing the respondent (a) to pay an amount of Rs. 190/- cost of the item, b) to pay the legal notice expenditure of Rs. 1000/-, c) to pay Rs. 1000/- towards damage caused to the dignity of the complainant, d) to pay Rs. 1000/- towards costs of the complaint as the Hon’ble forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
3. The respondent filed a counter in Telugu stating that the complainant purchased one item from his shop. He approached the respondent without bill and guarantee card for its replacement and that the item was not replaced by the respondent for not producing the bill and guarantee card. The complainant in his complaint further stated that on 29-11-2007 he visited the shop of the respondent along with bill and guarantee card for its replacement. It is pertinent to state that on 29-11-2007there is a marriage of his daughter as such the shop was closed two days prior to the marriage and two days after the marriage. So it is false to say that the complainant approached the respondent in his shop on 29-11-2007 which is the marriage day of his daughter. The respondent stated that the bill and guarantee card is required from the complainant. So that it can be sent to the manufacturer for further action.
On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
i. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
ii. To what relief?
On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A4 were marked and on behalf of the Respondents Ex. B1 was marked. No witnesses were examined on either side. Oral arguments were heard from both sides.
7. Point No. 1. Ex. A1 is the original cash bill dt. 2-8-2007 for Rs. 190/- in the name of the complainant issued by the respondent shop. Ex. A2 is the Original guarantee card dt. 2-8-2007 issued by the respondent shop. Ex. A3 is the office copy of legal notice dt. 13-12-2007. Ex. A4 is the original postal acknowledgement card addressed to the respondent by the counsel of the complainant. Ex. B1 is the Xerox copy of wedding card marriage of Dr. Anjani Tayaru on 29-11-2007.
8. As could be seen from the documentary evidence coupled with the oral arguments submitted by both sides it is on record that the complainant purchased one Geyser Element for Rs. 190/- on 2-8-2007 from the shop of the respondent vide Ex. A1. Ex. A2 is the guarantee card for the Geyser element purchased by the complainant. The warrantee period is for one year from the date of purchase i.e. on 2-8-2007 that means this guarantee card is in force. For the reasons unknown the respondent failed to give a reply to the legal notice Ex. A3. In view of guarantee card of Geyser Element which is in force the complainant is entitled for his claim.
9. Point No. 2. In the result the complaint is allowed. Directing the complainant to produce Geyser Element along with its bill and guarantee card to the respondent and the respondent in turn is directed to pay Rs. 190/- (Rupees one hundred and ninety only) towards cost of the Geyser Element. The respondent is also directed to pay an amount of Rs. 200/- (Rupees Two hundred only) towards cost of the complaint. The rest of the claim is disallowed. The respondent is directed to comply the order of the Hon’ble Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 10th April, 2008
MEMBER PRESIDENT I/C
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant : NIL For Respondents : NIL
Exhibits marked for complainant:-
Ex. A1 Cash bill dt. 2-8-07 for Rs. 190/- issued by the respondent shop
Ex. A2 Original guarantee card dt. 2-8-2007 issued by the respondent shop. Ex. A3 Office copy of legal notice dt. 13-12-2007.
Ex. A4 Original postal acknowledgement card addressed to the respondent by
the counsel of the complainant.
X/c of wedding card marriage of Dr. Anjani Tayaru on 29-11-07.
MEMBER PRESIDENT I/C
Copy to :-
1) Sri B. Siva Prasad Reddy, Advocate, Kadapa.
2) The Proprietor, Sri Maruthi Trading Corporation,
D.No. 19/239, Madras Road, Municipal Stall No. 1,
Kadapa City and District, A.P
1) Copy was made ready on :
2) Copy was dispatched on :
:
B.V.P. - - -
