Delhi

East Delhi

CC/433/2021

SUNITA - Complainant(s)

Versus

KISHAN (PROPRITER) - Opp.Party(s)

01 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110092

 

C.C. NO. 433/2021

 

	Sunita, W/o Sh. Anil Kumar, R/o 28 A, Pocket-3, DDA MIG Flats, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110096.	….Complainant
Versus
	Kishan(Proprietor) Bharat Service Center, Shop No. G-9, Pocket-6, Vardhman Plaza, MIG Flats, Gate No. 1, Mayur Vihar-3, Delhi-110096	……OP

 

Date of Institution: 26.10.2021

Judgment Reserved on: 25.04.2023

Judgment Passed on: 01.05.2023

                       

QUORUM:

Sh. S.S. Malhotra (President)

Sh. Ravi Kumar (Member)

Ms. Rashmi Bansal (Member)

 

Judgment By: Sh. S.S. Malhotra (President)

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

1. By this Judgment Commission shall dispose off the complaint of the complainant w.r.t. deficiency in service in not properly installing the television from one wall to another wall of the house & then by damaging the same in this process.
2. Facts as briefly stated are, that the complainant purchased a TV from M/s Navrang Audio Vidio(P) Ltd. on 20.08.2019. OP is engaged in the business of sale & servicing in the name of Bharat Service Center at Mayur Vihar.
3. The complainant called the OP for shifting her TV from one wall to another wall of the house on 07.08.2021, and after 11 days i.e. on 18.08.2021 OP sent two persons/employees to the house of the complainant for the purpose of shifting TV but in that process due to negligent act of the staff/employee of the OP, the TV got damaged and there was a crack on its screen. Staff/member tried to make the TV functional but it could not be possible and this information was given to the OP and complainant shared the photos of said damaged TV through Whatsapp along with model number, bill of TV purchased with the OP and on receiving of such documents and, OP even assured the complainant that either the OP will repair the screen of the TV of complainant or would replace the TV as soon as possible. However, nothing was done by the OP and even OP had hot exchange of words with her husband and there is lot of call-recordings between complainant and OP w.r.t. changing the TV or to make it functional, and ultimately on 02.09.2021 two staff member of the OP again visited the complainant’s house and took TV for the purpose of repairing or replacement. On 04.09.2021 the OP made call to the complainant thereby offering that 50% the repair/replacement which comes to Rs. 12,000/- would be borne by the complainant and it is submitted that complainant did not agree to such proposal of OP. It is further stated in the complaint that OP has neither repaired the TV nor has replaced the same, nor even has returned the TV as assured. Complainant has filed the present case, seeking direction to OP to repair and return the TV, alongwith compensation of Rs. 25,000/- w.r.t. deficiency physical & mental pain for last two years.
4. The OP was served and he appeared on 18.02.2022 in person and was directed to collect the copy of paper-book from the Commission but thereafter he never appeared and was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19.04.2022. Complainant has filed her evidence along with one pen drive. The Commission has perused the evidence and heard the arguments. The OP is not appearing and the Commission is not able to appreciate the version of the OP but from the recording/transcripts filed by the complainant, one fact is clear that TV was got damaged during the process of shifting from one wall to another and at present the TV/Product is in the possession of the OP which he has not returned. Section 2 (7) defines the ‘Consumer’ as follows:

7) (ii) hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose. 

 

There is no document on record by which it can be said that the complainant paid any consideration to the OP however, the  definition of the consumer is quite exhaustive & it includes the consideration paid/partly paid or promised to be paid, and therefore whenever the complainant or any service seeker places an order with the service provider, as per normal practice, service provider demands a particular sum w.r.t. the services to be tendered and once that service is tendered, then consideration/service charges are given particularly w.r.t. the repairing work of any kind either in the domestic use or in the commercial use & service charges are always paid after the repairing is done or service is provided. The same therefore is quite justifying that there is no document on record w.r.t. having paid any consideration in advance but it was always payable, if the TV would have been installed and the requisite service would have been produced. 

5. Keeping in view all these facts, complainant falls within the definition of ‘consumer’ and since the TV has not been repaired despite there being a long chat between complainant and OP from 25.08.2021-31.08.2021, and then upto 04.09.2021 & onwards, prima-facie the complainant has been able to prove that the TV got damaged during the process of shifting from one wall to another wall of the house and it was not repaired. Despite the assurance given by the OP from time to time, it was not repaired & in the considered opinion of this Commission, this amount to deficiency of service. Complainant has made her prayer that OP be directed to repair and return the TV.

This Commission is therefore directing the OP to repair the said TV and handover to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving the copy of order.

• OP would pay Rs.15,000/- to the complainant as compensation without interest 50% (Rs. 30,000/-) of the total value of invoice of TV which is Rs. 60,000/- as per invoice, as filed by the complainant. In the first instance this amount would not carry interest if paid within 30 days from the date of order however if the amount is not paid within 30 days the whole amount of Rs.45,000/- would carry interest @6% from the date of filing the complaint till actual realization amount payment.

Copy of the order be supplied/sent to both the parties free of cost as per Rules. 

File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced on 01.05.2023.