Uttar Pradesh

Aligarh

CC/150/2016

dr dyanand singh RAWAT - Complainant(s)

Versus

VINEET BANSAL PRO HI TEC POWER POINT - Opp.Party(s)

03 Oct 2023

ORDER

न्यायालय जिला उपभोक्ता विवाद प्रतितोष आयोग
अलीगढ
 
Complaint Case No. CC/150/2016
( Date of Filing : 17 Oct 2016 )
 
1. dr dyanand singh RAWAT
S/O SRI RAGHUBANS SINGH RAWAT R/O RAMPUR GHABHANA ALIGARH
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. VINEET BANSAL PRO HI TEC POWER POINT
MAHESHWARI COMPLEX RAMGHAT ROAD ALIGARH
2. M/S VENDING COMPANY
PLOT NO 28 SECTOR4 SECONDA SEEDKUL PANNAGAR RUDRAPURBY DIRECTOR
3. VISHAL GUPTA STOCKSIT BLUE MOUNT APPLYACESS PVT LTD
B96 PUSHPANJALI ENCLAVE PRITAMPURA NEW DELHI 110034
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. HASNAIN QURESHI PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. ALOK UPADHYAYA MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 03 Oct 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Case No. 150/2016   

IN THE MATTER OF

Dr. Dyanand Singh Rawat S/o Sri Raghuvansh Singh Rawat R/o Rampur Gabhana Thana Gabhana District, Aligarh

                             (Through: Advocate Kamta Prasad Varshney)

                                           V/s

  1. Sri Vineet Bansal, Pro. Hiteck Power Point, Maheshwari Complex, Ramghat Road, Aligarh

(Through: Advocate Yogendra Kumar Sharma)

  1.  M/s Bending Company,Plot No.28, Sector4, Second(A) Seedkul,Panthnagar, Rudrapur, Pin 263153

(Through: Advocate Atul Kumar)

  1. Vishal Gupta Stockiest, Blue Mount Appliences Pvt. Ltd. B 90 Pushpanjali Enclave, PritamPura, New Delhi                            

CORAM

 Present:

  1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
  2. Shri Alok Upadhyaya, Member
  3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

  1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-
  1.  The Ops be directed to pay the cost of water purifier Rs.30500/ with interest @24% annum.
  2. The Ops be directed to pay Rs.25000/ as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.11000/ as cost of the case.
  1. Complainant stated that he is a doctor and running a clinic in Rampur Gabhana, Aligarh. He has purchased a water purifier Blue Mount BM77 Industrial Online from Op 1 on 23.6.2016 for Rs.30500/. Water purifier is manufactured and stockiest by Op 2&3. Op no.1 has given a receipt dated 23.6.2016. The water purifier Blue Mount BM77 Industrial online was installed by workshop employee on 24.6.2016 which was stopped working after few hours. Complainant complained to the service center on toll free number 9111494915 and mobile no. 9837572734. Mr. Amir, a mechanic visited on 25.6.2016 on clinic. He told the complainant that water purifier is in manufacturing defect and defect cannot be removed. Op no.2 &3 are manufacturer and stockiest and informed to the service center. Nobody  turnedup from the service center for replacement or repair of the water purifier. Complainant sent legal notices dated 8.8.2016 and 8.9.2016 to the ops no response. Hence file the complaint.     
  2. OP no.1 submitted in WS that He is the owner of Hi Tech Power point shop and sales and repair the water purifier, battery and invertor. Complainant purchased a water purifier Blue Mount BM77 Industrial Online on 23.6.2016 and installed. He has sent employee immediately for repairing the water purifier on the complaint of complainant which was working after repairing. He has sent his employee to the clinic for repair of water purifier Blue Mount BM77 Industrial Online for free service. Complainant demanded the value of water purifier. Inability was shown by op to return the value and assured to repair the water purifier.
  3. OP 2 filed Vakalatnama and did not contest the case. Op no.3 did not appear  inspite of sufficient Service.
  4.  Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. And Op no1has also filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings.
  5. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
  6. The first question of consideration before complainant is entitled any relief.
  7. Complainant stated that he had purchased the product on 23.6.2016 and it stop working on 24.6.2016. OP has not specifically denied the allegation and stated that the mechanic was deputed to repair the product as and when the complainant was received. It is evident that the water purifier was not in proper working order and complainant is entitled for its replacement or its value.
  8. The question formulated above is decided in favour of complainant.
  9. We hereby direct the OPs to replace the water purifier of same model or to pay the price of the water purifier  Rs. 30500/with 9 %per annum pende lite and future interest. We also direct to the op to pay the complainant Rs.5000/ as litigation expenses.
  10. Ops  shall comply with the direction within 45 days failing which  shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
  11. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
  12. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. HASNAIN QURESHI]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. ALOK UPADHYAYA]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.