West Bengal

Bankura

CC/32/2019

Sri Sanjib Kumar Nandi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Electronics Centre, Kotulpur Netajee More - Opp.Party(s)

Jayanta Kumar Mukharjee

13 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Consumer  Complaint  No. 32/2019

Date of Filing : 24.06.2019

Before:                                                                                                                         

1. Samiran Dutta                Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee               Ld. Member. 

3.  Sudhakar Ghosh             Ld. Member.

For the Complainant: Ld Advocate 1. Durgaprasad Sarkar 2.Jayanta Kr. Mukhopadhyay

For the O.P. : None  

Complainant    

Sri Sanjib Kumar Nandi, S/o Sri Gourhari Nandi resident of Benerchack, P.O. – Karakberia, P.S. – Kotulpur, District Bankura

 Opposite Party 

1. Electronics Centre, Kotulpur Netajee More, P.O. & P.S. – Kotulpur, District Bankura

2. Nilesh Dalmia (Samsung Service Manager) Mohan Electronics, Kuchkuchia Road, Bankura, P.O., P.S. & District Bankura

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT

Order No.24                                                                                   

Dt. 13-12-2022

                     

Hazira is filed on behalf of the complainant through advocate.

No step is taken by the O.P. who are found absent on repeated call.

The case is fixed for submission of W.V. but no W.V. has been filed till date in spite of getting sufficient opportunity.

Hence, the case is taken up for Ex-parte hearing.

The Complainant purchased one Samsung LEDNUA 24H Television Set by paying a sum of Rs.11,600/- to O.P. No.1 under proper receipt on 29-12-2017 and on 05-10-2018 said T.V. set developed some trouble whereby no picture was found but sound was O.K. The defective T.V. set was brought to the O.P. No.2/Service Centre for proper service and repairing but nothing was done to make the T.V. set in normal operation. Though no service report is forthcoming on the record but neither O.P. 1 nor O.P.2 appeared before the Commission to contradict the claim of the complainant and so averment of the complainant in the petition of complaint is to be accepted So far the allegation of defective T.V. set is concerned.

                                                                                                                                                                            Contd…….p/2

 

Page: 2

The O.P. No.1 being the product seller has the duty to render proper service to the  defective set within the Warrantee period and the O.P. No.2 being the Service Centre cannot be blamed for the same.

Heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainant and perused the relevant documents on record.

Prima-facie case of the complainant is established.

The complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Hence it is ordered……….

That the case is allowed Ex-parte against the O.P. No.1

The O.P. No.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within one month from this date.

If this option is not exercised within the statutory period the O.P. No.1 has to pay the entire price of the T.V. set i.e. Rs.11,600/- together with compensation of Rs.5,000/- within two months thereafter.

In default of either option the complainant is at liberty to get the decretal amount realized through Execution process.

Both parties be supplied copy of this Judgement free of cost.

                               __________________                                     ________________                              ________________

                             HON’BLE   PRESIDENT                           HON’BLE    MEMBER                     HON’BLE    MEMBER