DATE OF DISPOSAL: 06.06.2023

Sri Satish Kumar Panigrahi, President:

The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed this Consumer complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Opposite Parties (in short O.Ps) and for redressal of his grievance before this Commission. 

The complainant purchased a vehicle tube by paying Rs.250/- from the O.P. Then went to vehicle tyre repair and servicing centre situated at Janana Hospital Road near to IBM center for change of his front wheel tube substituting the new one in place of old tube of his Hero Honda CD Delux Motor cycle. The repair shop while checked the new tube before using in his vehicle wheel, he found out two small whole on that new tube. He repaired the same with using solution, sticker tube etc. and use it in the wheel tyre with filing of air collecting the required repair amount of Rs.120/- from the complainant. Again found that neck pin using for air filling purpose was not worked properly. Hence he changed a new air pin in that new tube just for adjustment for that time being. The complainant has been surprised and tried to raise objection before the O.P. shop.  Due to heavy thunder storm on that day, the complainant have been severely tired, miserably harassed and suffered a lot since 11.00 A.M. to 2.45 P.M. In fact, the complainant has been engaged almost 3 hours 45 minutes during that period losing his whole work. He could not tolerate and digest the same. The complainant has gone to the O.P. shop and informed about that problem, but without showing any sympathy, their worker misbehaved the complainant and told him that the tube rate is matter of Rs.250/- only and it has no such exchange system and once goods sold means that is  impossible to exchange and return back. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops the complainant prayed to direct the O.Ps to refund the costs of tube of Rs.250/-, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony, harassment, misbehave, cheating and deficiencies of service and for unfair trade practice in the best interests of justice.

            3. Notices were issued against the Opposite Parties but they neither choose to appear nor filed any written version in the stipulated time period as per C.P.Act, 2019. Hence all the O.Ps set exparte on dated 07.07.2022.

           4. To substantiate his case the complainant has filed affidavit in support of his case. 

           5. On the date of exparte hearing of the case, we heard from the complainant and perused the case record and the materials placed on it. It reveals that the complainant purchased a tube for payment of Rs.277/- to Padmalaya Motors, vide Challan No. 14582 dated 28.03.2021. The repair shop while checked the new tube before using in his vehicle wheel, he found two small whole on that new tube. He repaired the same with using solution, sticker tube etc. and use it in the wheel tyre with filing of air collecting the required repair amount of Rs.120/- from the complainant. Again found that neck pin using for air filling purpose was not worked properly. Hence he changed a new air pin in that new tube just for adjustment for that time being.

             6. We have also thoughtfully considered the submissions made before us by the complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that though opportunity was given to the O.Ps to defend the case but they failed to do so. As such taking the sole testimony of the complainant into consideration it is presumed that the complainant’s contention is true.

             7. On foregoing discussion it is crystal clear that the Ops are negligent in rendering proper service to the complainant. Hence, in our considered view there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. So, in the instant case the Op no.1 negligently acted and caused a legal injury to the complainant so he needs to compensate. As far as compensation is concerned in this case, the complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards the loss suffered by him due to negligence of the OP. No.1 in the fact and circumstances of the case. However, he has not corroborated his claim by filling any cogent documentary evidence that his actual loss was Rs.1,00,000/-. Thus it appears to be hypothetical claim towards compensation.

             8. In the result, the complainant’s case is allowed on exparte against the O.Ps. The O.Ps are jointly and severally liable as such they are directed to refund Rs.250/- along with litigation cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which all the dues shall carry 12% interest per annum till its actual date of realisation and the complainant is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for realization of all dues. This case is disposed of accordingly.

 The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. A copy of this order be also sent to the Secretary, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Odisha, Cuttack for information.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

Pronounced on 06.06.2023