Date of filing:- 04/10/2008

Date of Order :- 06/03/2009

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT)

BARGARH.

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 66 of 2008

Pramod Kumar Agrawal, S/o Mohanlal Agrawal, aged about 30(thirty) years, Resident of Ward No.6, Hospital Road, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist:- B a r g a r h

... ... ... Complainant.

- V e r s u s -

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, S/o Mahesh Kumar Sharma, Proprietor Sharma Electricals, Bhatli Chowk, N.H.6, Bargarh, Po/Ps/ Dist. Bargarh.

... ... ... Opposite Party.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant:- Sri H. B. Debta, Advocate with other Advocates.

For the Opposite Party :- Sri P.Sharma, Advocate with other Advocates.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Sri Gouri Shankar Pradhan ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.

Sri Binod Kumar Pati ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Miss Bhagyalaxmi Dora ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.


Dt. 06/03/2009 -: J U D G E M E N T :-

Presented by B.L.Dora, Member:-

In this Case, the Complainant has purchased an Inverter with Battery IN 1500 plus MFG-316 bearing Serial No. 69910 from the Opposite Party on dated 23/02/2007 by paying Rs.5,300/-(Rupees five thousand three hundred)only for Inverter & Rs.7,050/-(Rupees seven thousand fifty)only for Inverter Exide Battery.



The Opposite Party has assured 18 months warranty for any type of defect & issued a Warranty Card accompanied with his seal & signature in this respect .

But after four months of purchase on dated 18/06/2007, the said Inverter stopped functioning. On complain the opposite Party has rectified the defects in Battery once & avoided the request of the Complainant to replace the battery with different pretext.

Then after three months on dated 10/09/2007, the same defect occurred & was also temporarily rectified & on dated 15/08/2008 the Battery was damaged & is given to the Opposite Party for replacement which was done within the Warranty period .The Opposite Party has demanded the original Money Receipt with warranty Card to be sent to the Company for replacement & supplied a Xerox copy thereof with endorsement “Replacement Battery IN 1500 plus” on dated 15/08/2008 to the Complainant which is filed herewith.



After submission of the Battery the Opposite Party has never listen the request of the Complainant for replacement of Battery & at last said that the Company has repudiated the said claim & directed the Complainant to purchase a new Battery of the present market price of Rs.9,700/-(Rupees nine thousand seven hundred)only which amounts to deficiency in service by the Opposite Party.



In the prayer portion the Complainant claims for the replacement of Battery with extensions of fresh warranty in alternate refund the value of the Battery in present market price i. e. Rupees 9,700/-(Rupees nine thousand seven hundred) only with compensation of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only for damage & mental agony with penalties & future interest of 18% per annum along with cost of the proceeding.



In order to strengthen his case, the Complainant has filed the Xerox copies of Money Receipt with warranty card.



In it’s response, the Opposite Party has admitted that the Battery which he sold to the Complainant requires proper service & he did it twice. The warranty specifies that to get the Exide Battery service check- up at least once in two months which was not done. It cannot be denied that, no disturbances occurred in the said Battery for a long period of 11(eleven) months. When the Complainant made complain on date 15/08/2008, the Opposite Party demanded the Warranty card on the same date within the warranty period. But the Complainant brought the same on date 28/08/2008, after the expiry of eighteen months according to the warranty card. Here the Complainant did not care the warranty condition.

The Opposite Party has filed the Xerox copy of the Warranty card with two Affidavits in this regard.



Perused the documents & heard from the learned counsels for the parties. It is obvious that the said Battery, sold by the Opposite Party bears several defects in it by which reason it create problems time to time which was rectified by the Opposite Party in two times. But after several rectification also the same problem occurred. The Opposite Party received the Battery for replacement within the warranty period. Finally the Battery was damaged on date 15/08/2008 amounts to defects in good sold by the Opposite Party.



The Advocate for the Complainant has filed Citations for his Case that 2006(I) C.P.R.,429 where manufacturing defect found three times within warranty period & the District Forum directed for replacement .The Advocate for the Complainant has also filed other Citations like 2006 (I) C. P. R. 56-C.P.Act, 1986 & 2005 (I) C. P. R. 279 which supports the above.

In the above discussion the Forum is satisfies to allow the complaint & Ordered,

O R D E R

The Opposite Party is directed to refund the price of the said Battery, sold by him with a sum of Rupees Two thousand for mental agony & the cost of litigation to the Complainant within 30(thirty) days from the date of order, failing which the total amount awarded shall carry 18% interest per annum till the date of actual payment.

The Case is disposed of.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

Sd/-

I agree, I agree, ( Miss Bhagyalaxmi Dora)

Sd/- Sd/- Member.

(Sri Gouri Shankar Pradhan) (Sri Binod Kumar Pati)

P r e s i d e n t. Member.