DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NUH

Consumer Complaint No. 16 of 2018

                                                Date of Institution:       28.09.2018

                                                Date of Decision   :      30.04.2019

Manish Computer, Old Delhi Alwar Road, Nuh, Proprietor Manish Kumar son of Shri Dev Parkash, R/o Ward No. 10, Mohalla Khera, District Nuh.

                                                                   .. Complainant.

                                                Versus

1.      M/s Sanduja Battery & Electrical, shop No. 2, Baluda Road, Sohna, Tehsil Sohna District Gurgaon. (Mob. No. 09310954900-9416354900), E-mail: 2.      Luminous Power Technologies Pvt. Ltd. C56 Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase 2, Mayapuri New Delhi-110064 (Ph. No. 18001033039-011-40778200).

                                                                                                ..Respondents.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

BEFORE:             Rajbir Singh Dahiya               :         PRESIDENT

                             Urmil Beniwal                         :         MEMBER

PRESENT:           Complainant in person.

                             Respondents exparte vide order dated 23.10.2018.

ORDER:

RAJBIR SINGH DAHIYA, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has purchased four batteries model Luminous (batteries no. 1. E4G269F1023905, 2. E4G269F1023913, E45269F1023898, 4. C4G269F1020302) from respondent no. 1 amounting to Rs. 38000 alongwith 30 months warrantee. But the aforesaid batteries are creating problem within 2 years 3 months and complainant has lodged the complaint to respondent no. 2 on customer care no. 18001033039. After the complaint, the technician of respondent company had visited and after checking the batteries he says that the aforesaid batteries sent to service centre for checking and we return the same within seven days and says that if the batteries were found defected the company will replace the batteries. Afterwards, on dated 11.07.2018, the technician of respondent no. 2 had sent the aforesaid batteries in service centre of the company and after elapsing the seven days the technician of company had returned all the batteries.  Thereafter, the respondent no. 2 call the complainant for verification and complainant had verified the same. But after elapsing the two days, the aforesaid batteries creating again problem and complainant again contact the customer care and ask for visiting the technician. The technician had come and says that the batteries had again sent to service centre and the says that the same were returned after 7-10 days but the complainant has refused the same but the technician come 2-3 time for checking the batteries but the technician has not give the satisfied answer for removing the defect of the batteries and thereafter, the company had closed the complaint of the complainant without any satisfied answer. The complainant has sent the complaint to company on dated 03.8.2018 through email and 08.08.2018 the complainant also sent the legal notice to company. Hence, this complaint. The complainant has prayed that the respondents nos. 1 & 2 be directed to replace the aforesaid batteries and pay Rs. 30,000/- compensation of mental agony and harassment.

2.                After registration and admission of the complaint, notices were issued to the respondent nos. 1 & 2. But none has appeared on behalf of respondents nos. 1 & 2 and the same were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 23.10.2018.  

3.                Complainant closed the evidence after tendering the affidavit Annexure-A1 and documents Annexure B1 to B7.

4.                Arguments heard and file perused.

5.                The respondents were_____but inspite of service they did not come present hence, they were ordered to be proceeded to be exparte. Though, there is no defence on behfal of respondents but it is onerous upon this forum to look into the fact and law placed on the file. There is a documentary evidence from Annexure B-1 to B-7 which is unequivocally goes unrebutted. Since, the documentary evidence being legally tenable, we are left with no option but to accept the averments and contentions forwarded by the complainant. The act of the respondents comes under the deficiency in service. Since, the complainant loss his faith in respondents and we restrict to pass an award for replacement and we pass an award against respondents nos. 1 & 2 and the respondents nos. 1 & 2 jointly and severally are directed to pat Rs. 38000/- alongwith interest @ 9% from the filing of the complaint till its realization and pay Rs. 25000/- compensation & mental agony to the complainant. Complainant is directed to return the aforesaid batteries to respondents. Respondents are directed to comply the order within 30 days. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the records.    

Announced on: 30.04.2019                      (Rajbir SINGH Dahiya)

                                                                   President

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nuh.

(Urmil Beniwal)

                                                                   Member

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nuh