DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

Civil Station, Palakkad 678001, Kerala

Dated this the 22^nd day of January, 2009

Present: Smt.Seena.H, President

Smt.Preetha.G. Nair, Member

Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

C.C.No.137/2007

T.Narayanankuttty,

S/o.K.M.Narayanan Nair,

Ananda,

Manissery Post,

Ottapalam, Palakkad . - Complainant

Vs

The Proprietor,

Universal Transformers,

Opp. Parakunnam Mosque,

College Road, Palakkad. - Opposite party

O R D E R

By Seena.H, President

The case of the complainant in brief is as follows:

Complainant purchased an inverter in exchange of his old inverter from the opposite party for Rs.3850/- on 28/7/07. As his old battery was not functioning properly, complainant suggested to supply new Exide battery for Rs.5500/- in order to have a trouble free service. Total cash payment of Rs.8500/- was made and a cheque for Rs.850/- was given to the opposite party. Opposite party assured proper setting up of system within 1 week which was never fulfilled. The problem experienced by the complainant is that when power failure occurs, the inverter supplies power during which time battery gets discharged and when power comes on, the battery does not get fully charged indication within reasonable time. It takes 3 to 4 days for charged indication instead of few hours in normal case. Inverter is not compatible for quick charging of the battery. Opposite party made some adjustments in the inverter but the condition never improved. It took more than 3 days for the battery to indicate fully charged condition. According to the complainant, inverter supplied by the opposite party is defective. Hence the complainant claims refund of Rs.8500/- paid in cash, Rs.1000/- as cost fixed for old inverter and Rs.3000/- as cost.

2. Even though notice was served opposite party never appeared before the forum. Hence was set exparte.

3. Evidence adduced consists of proof affidavit along with Exts.A1 to A3 on the side of the complainant. Ext.C1, Commission Report marked.

4. The only question to be decided is whether the inverter supplied by the opposite party is defective or not. It is evident from Ext.A1 to A3 that the complainant has purchased the said inverter on 28/7/07 and warranty period extends to 2 years from the date of purchase. Defects noted is within the period of warranty. Further commissioner filed report stating defect in the said inverter. Report is marked as Ext.C1. No contrary evidence to that of the complainant’s is adduced by the opposite party.

5. In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.9,500/- (Rupees Nine thousand and five hundred only) being the cost of inverter and battery and further to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of communication of order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum. On payment, complainant shall handover the inverter and battery to the opposite party.

6. Pronounced in the open court on this the 22^nd day of January, 2009

Sd/-

Smt.Seena.H,

President

Sd/-

Smt.Preetha.G. Nair,

Member

Sd/-

Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K,

Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 – Invoice/Cash No.441 dt.28/7/07 for Rs.3850/- issued by opposite party

Ext.A2 – Invoice No.7 dt.1/8/07 for Rs.5512/- issue by opposite party

Ext.A3 – Warranty card

Forum’s exhibit

Ext.C1 – Commissioner’s report

Cost (allowed)

Rs. Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings to the complainant