Manjunath Kamath.M.

R/at Near SAT High School, } Complainant

Manjeshwar of Kasaragod Taluk.

(Adv. C.Damodharan, Kasaragod)


Angel Techno Services Pvt.Ltd, } Opposite party

TP 418 P/R KTP Building, South

Bazar, Kannur.
O R D E R

The case of the complainant in brief is that the Panasonic brand TV he purchased became defective during its warranty period and he entrusted it for repair with opposite party on 05-05-07. Opposite party repaired and delivered it on 14-06-2007. Since the repair was defective he could not get the benefit of the repair. The defect recurred on 23-11-2007 and on 29-12-07. On these occasions also opposite party repaired the TV. During first week of April 2008 TV again went wrong. Hence not satisfied with the repair work of opposite party complainant engaged another authorized repairer. According to the said repairer the defect were recurred due to fixing duplicate spare parts by opposite party and the TV set became damaged irreparably.

2. The complainant could get Rs.500/- only for the defective old TV and he purchased a new TV for Rs.12,000/-. Due to the delay and defective repair of TV by opposite party the complainant suffered mental agony and therefore the complaint.

3. Opposite party remained absent inspite of receipt of notice issued by registered post. Hence opposite party set exparte. Complainant filed affidavit in lieu of oral evidence. Exts A1 to A11 marked. Counsel for the complainant heard.

4. The recurrence of the defect of the TV repaired by the opposite party during short intervals the deficient nature of service of the opposite party. There is no contra evidence to show that the defect of the TV was repeated due to any other reasons.

Therefore complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation to the complainant for the improper service rendered to the complainant with a cost of Rs.2500/-.