BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 27^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

ORDER

SMT. K. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR, MEMBER

Complaint filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, seeking direction to OP to refund Rs.23,999/-, to pay Rs.90,000/- towards compensation for the deficiency of service and mental agony, to pay cost of litigation and such other relief.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

Complainant has purchased Mi 125.7 cm 4K ultra HD TV from the OP through Amazon.com. After placing the order on 11.07.2022, complainant received order No.402-6719568-4333955 and invoice No.BLX1-72799 and bearing vide TV Sl.No.22154/181100031815. Complainant found defect in the said TV, within short time for that he contacted OP’s service centre but the problem has not been solved by OP. OP making excuses that parts are not available to rectify the defect. When the service centre has not rectified, complainant contacted OP on several times over telephone but, OP did not respond to the request of complainant. Complainant stated that OP intentionally neglected the complainant and harassed him. Complainant further stated that he got duped by supplying defective TV invested hard earned money, cheated by the OP. Therefore complainant got issued legal notice on 02.01.2023 to OP, OP neither replied to the legal notice nor rectified the defect in the said TV. Hence complainant alleged the deficiency of service on the part of OP by not rectifying the defect on though it has warranty period and caused deficiency of service. Hence he approached this commission for the relief.

3. After the service of notice to OP, counsel for OP filed a memo of undertaking on the date of appearance and prays time to file vakalath and version on its behalf, but OP neither filed its version nor appeared on the date of proceedings. Hence the stage is set down to adduce evidence of complainant. Accordingly complainant filed his affidavit evidence along with 4 documents and certificate U/S 65 B of Indian Evidence Act, which are marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. Complainant reiterated as stated in its complaint.

4. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant has proves the deficiency of service on the part of OP?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

5.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:- In the affirmative

Point No.2:- Partly affirmative

Point No.3:- As per the final order

REASONS

6. Point No.1:- On perusal of the documents produced by the complainant it is proved that he purchased Mi 125.7 cm (50 inches) 4K ultra HD Android Smart LED TV through Amazon by paying Rs.29,999/-. For that Amazon has issued invoice which is at Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2. With regard to the defect arised in the said TV and the same has been brought to the notice of OP by rising complainant on several occasion, is proved by the documents Ex.P.4. The complaint raised with OP on 26.02.2022 on the reason that the TV is defective and the OP stated that TV is under the investigation. The several documents disclose that the repair needs at least 20 days. However, after 20 days, it has not repaired; complainant requested to replace the same with new one, that the same has been acknowledged by OP and assured that the purpose of repair/replacement take 10 working days, same time it may also get delayed due to transit issue and available of spare parts as well. OP even assured the problem will be resolved at the earliest. In E-mail dated 14.01.2023 and 29.01.2023, OP admitted that the TV is in its custody and also apologized for the inconvenience caused to complainant, it shows the allegations made by the complainant is accepted by OP and moreso OP has not rectified the same, though it is under warranty.

7. Upon going through the documents of warranty policy of Mi LED smart TV which the complainant has produced, TV got warranty for 1 year and panel has got 1 year additional warranty that means panel got 2 years of warranty. Since the complainant has purchased the TV on 11^th July 2022, problem occurred within short period. Considering the E-mail communication produced by complainant is on 23.12.2022 which is lapse of 5 months of purchase, it is well within the warranty period OP has to contend the defect immediately after its notice but he did not repair it well within the time and returned. Complainant sought replacement of TV when the OP has not rectified the defect for its use. Since complainant has approached this commission, prayed for refund of money with interest and compensation.

8. OP neither appeared before the commission to defend his case nor place his evidence to deny the allegations against him. Hence the documents placed by complainant are unchallenged and he proved the deficiency of service on the part of OP by not rectifying the defect in the TV nor replace the TV as he sought, when the TV is under warranty period. Hence on the above reasons OP is liable to compensate the complainant and we answer Point No.1 in affirmative.

9. Point No.2:- Complainant has paid Rs.29,999/- to purchase TV. Though it is under warranty, the defective TV has not rectified and the investment made on TV went in vain. Hence OP has no right to retain the amount he paid towards TV, without any benefits out of it. Therefore OP is liable to refund Rs.29,999/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 23.12.2022 (from the date of first E-mail communication by raising complaint before OP). With regard to the compensation he sought Rs.90,000/- for mental agony and deficiency of service by OP, seems to be exorbitant. However complainant might have gone through mental sufferings without the TV at home for 7-8 months which is very essential now a day, even after paying huge amount towards it. Hence he is entitled to get Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation. For the foregoing reasons we answer Point No.2 in partly affirmative.

10. Point No.3:- In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

i) Complaint filed by complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, is partly allowed.

ii) OP is directed to refund Rs.29,999/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 23.12.2022 till realization.

iii) OP is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for the deficiency of service and Rs.5,000/- for the cost of proceedings within 30 days from this day, failing which OP shall pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on Award amount from the date of order till realization.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 27^th day of JUNE, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL