BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

                       (Piravom Camp Sitting)         Date of filing :  01.10.2016

                                                                                              Date of Order : 06.11.2017

PRESENT:

 Shri. Cherian K. Kuraikose,                                   President

 Shri. Sheen Jose,                                                 Member  
Smt. Beena Kumari V.K.                                        Member.

                            CC.No.557/2016

                                   Between

O R D E R

Beena Kumari V.K.   Member 

1)     A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

         This complaint is filed by the Secretary of Piravom Municipality alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party – Ammini Energy Systems Pvt.  The former Piravom Panchayath is functioning as Piravom Municipality with effect from 01.11.2015.  The then Piravom Panchayath had entered into an agreement with the opposite party on 24.08.2015 agreeing to instal 895 numbers of street lights on the electrical posts in the Piravom Panchayat/Municipal area 2.11 Wat Auto on and off CFL lights were agreed to be installed at the rate of Rs.1415/- per CFL bulb and Rs.110/per bulb for other street lights.  It was also agreed between the parties that warranty will be provided to the street lights installed on payment of the entire contract amount.  Accordingly as per the invoices dated 21.01.2016 and 29.03.2016 Rs.12,66,425/- and Rs.98,450/- were paid to the opposite parties by the complainant.  The total payment amounted to Rs.13,64,875/- and the opposite parties had installed the street lights in March 2016.  It is contended that many of the street lights installed by the opposite party had become functionless or defective and the opposite party was required to do urgent repair those street lights vide registered letter issued by the complainant on 23.062016.  But the opposite parties failed to rectify the defects of all defective lights as agreed in the contract entered into between the parties.  The complainant caused to issue a Lawyer Notice on 16.08.2016 stating the above facts and requiring the opposite party to make urgent repairs of the defective street lights.  But there was no response from the opposite party even after the receipt of the lawyer notice of 16.08.2016.  As per the agreement, the opposite party had offered warranty for a period of 15 months from the date of installation of street lights and the opposite party had also given extended warranty for a further period of 2 months on 18.01.2016.  The complainant contended that the act of the opposite party in not rectifying the defects of the defective street lights during the warranty period amounted to deficiency in service and violation contract entered between the complainant and the opposite party.  Hence this complaint is filed before this Forum seeking directions of this Forum to the opposite party to make urgent repairs of the defective street lights/or to replace the defective street lights, to pay compensation of Rs.4,08,700/- to the complainant for the monetary loss and inconvenience caused to the complainant and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant.

2)     Notice was issued to the opposite party from this Forum on 05.10.2016 and both the complainant and the opposite party appeared before this Forum on 24.10.2016.  The opposite party was given further time of 15 days to file its version.  But the opposite party did not file the version within the time allowed by this Forum.  On 21.11.2016 the opposite party appeared and informed that the matter was settled subsequently and the complainant filed an Interim Application in I.A No.745/2016 stating that the opposite party had not settled and the opposite party had not done any repairs of the defective street lights which were installed in ward No.9.  Therefore, again notice was issued to the opposite party.  The notice was returned with endorsement “intimated”.  Hence there was deemed service of notice on the opposite party and the opposite party is set ex-parte and this case is disposed of ex-parte. 

3)     The complainant was heard on 09.10.2017.

4)     The issues emanated for the consideration of this Forum are as follows:

 (i)   Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

(ii)   Whether the complainant is entitled to get the defective CFL or other street bulbs repaired under the warranty or on payment basis?

(iii)  Whether the opposite party is liable to pay compensation and costs of this proceedings to the complainant?

5)       The evidence in this case consisted of the ex-parte proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the documentary evidences furnished by the complainant which were marked as Exbt. A1 to A7.  Neither oral nor documentary evidences adduced by the opposite party.

6)       Issue No. (i) and (ii)

          Exbt. A1 is a copy of the agreement entered into between the complainant and the opposite party on 24.08.2015.  The opposite party – Ammini Energy Systems Pvt. Ltd. vide the above agreement agreed to supply and install CFL Street lights with ISI marks within 30 days from the date of communication of the sanction order of the KSEB and it was also agreed by the opposite party to provide warranty for 15 months from the date of installation of CFL street lights in Pivavom Panchayat/ Municipal area on payment of the entire contract amount to the opposite party.  The warranty period was extended for a further period of 2 months as evidenced by Exbt. A2 letter of the opposite party dated 18.01.2016.  The warranty period was from 18.09.2015 to 17.02.2017.  During the warranty period ie., on 23.06.2016 the opposite party was required to urgently repair or replace the defective CFL and other bulbs installed by the opposite party during the Financial Year, 2015-16 as evidenced by Exbt.A4 letter.  But there was no response from the opposite party to the above letter.  The opposite party was contacted by the complainant through e-mail and over phone also. In the circumstance, there was no response from the opposite party, the complainant caused to issue Exbt.A6 lawyer notice dated 12.08.2016 to the opposite party requiring the opposite party to urgently repair the defective street lights.  The said notice was served on the opposite parties as evidenced by Exbt. A7 postal acknowledgment card.  It is submitted by the complainant that the entire contract amount of Rs.13,64,875/- was paid as on 18.09.2015 as evidenced by Exbt. A3 and A3 (a) invoices both dated 18.09.2015.  Exbt. A4 is the true copy of the DD for Rs. 12,66,425/- and                    Exbt. A5 (a) is the true copy of the DD for Rs.98,450/-both issued by the complainant to the opposite party.  Exbt. A4 is dated 21.01.2016 and Exbt. A5 is dated 29.02.2016.  The complainant has thus proved that the entire contract amount was paid as evidenced by Exbt.A5 and A5 (a).  In the above circumstances non repair or non-replacement of the defective street lights during the warranty period amounted to gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complainant has sufficiently proved gross negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.

7)       The opposite party had installed CFL street lights during the Financial Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 as stated below:

        We find that the complainant is legally entitled to get warranty service free of cost in respect of CFL street lights installed during 2014-15 and 2015-16.  Though it was submitted by the opposite party on 21.11.2016 the matter was settled, the complainant submitted that no repairs were actually done to the defective street lights installed in ward No.9.  The complainant sought for the orders of this Forum directing the opposite party to repair or replace the defective CFL lamps including those defective CFL lamps in ward No.9.  It is found that the complainant had promptly during the warranty period itself requested the opposite party to repair the defective CFL and other bulbs installed in Financial Year 2015-16. But the opposite party did not do anything to repair or replace the defective CFL or other bulbs.  Therefore we find that the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and therefore the complainant is legally entitled to get the defective CFL or other bulbs repaired or replaced.

8)     Issue No. (iii)

The complainant had suffered a lot of inconvenience and monetary loss due to the deficient service offered by the opposite party during the warranty period.  The complainant has sought for a direction of this Forum to the opposite party to pay Rs.4,08,700/- to the complainant.  In the fact and circumstances of the case, we find that an amount of Rs.10,000/- will be sufficient to compensate the inconvenience and monetary loss suffered by the complainant. We therefore direct the opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the inconvenience and monetary loss suffered by the complainant.

9)     The complainant had to spend their valuable time and money to contest this case.  Therefore, we find that the complaint is entitled to get costs of this proceedings which we fix at Rs.5,000/-.

10)    In the result the complaint is allowed and we direct as follows.

1.   The opposite parties shall replace or repair the defective CFL lamps and other bulbs installed by the opposite party during 2014-15 and 2015-16 including those defective lamps in ward No.9 of Piravom Municipality.

2.   The opposite party shall pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation to the complainant for the inconvenience and monetary loss suffered by the complainant. 

3.   The opposite party shall also pay Rs.5000/- towards costs of the proceedings.

The above orders shall be complied with, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the compensation amount shall carry 12% interest p.a. from the 31^st day of receipt of this order till the date of payment.  

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 6^th day of November 2017.

Sd/-Beena Kumari V.K., Member

Sd/-Cherian K. Kuriakose, President

Sd/-Sheen Jose, Member

Forwarded by Order

Senior Superintendent

                                                          APPENDIX

Complainants Exhibits

Opposite party's Exhibits:          Nil

Date of Despatch

                   By Hand      :

                   By Post       :

                                         …................