PER MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant he had purchased mobile instrument from the O.P.No.1 on 11^th April, 2012 for Rs.37,000/-.  Within three months from the date of purchase, it was found that the instrument was defective.  Therefore, he approached the O.P.No.1.  It was sent to the O.P.No.3 by O.P.No1.  It was not repaired for thirty days.  After thirty days, it was given back to the complainant. Again, it was not recharging properly.  Therefore, the complaint was made.  The instrument was defective therefore it was necessary for the opponent to replace it. But, the opponents refused.  Therefore, the legal notice was issued.  It was not complied. Therefore, the complainant has filed this complaint for refund of the purchase amount of Rs.37,000/- and compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental harassment.  He has also claimed loss of Rs.1 Lakh. 

2)                The O.P.No.1 appeared and filed written statement.  According to him, he had sold the instrument but service liability was of the O.P.No.2 and 3.  He is not responsible for the service. 

3)                The O.P.no.2 and 3 remained absent though duly served therefore they are proceeded exparte.  The complainant filed affidavit of evidence.  The O.P.No.1 failed to file his affidavit of evidence.  The opponents remained absent since April-2014. 

4)                The complainant has filed his affidavit of evidence in support of his claim.  He has produced tax invoice showing the payment of Rs.37,000/- to the O.P.No.1.  He has also produced Job Card showing his complaint about defect in the instrument.  He has also produced Notice Copy. The evidence on record is sufficient to show that the instrument was defective.  The defect was found within warranty period therefore it was necessary to replace the instrument.  As the opponents failed, the complainant is entitled for the refund of the instrument price amount of Rs.37,000/-. The O.P.No.1 can not avoid his responsibility by saying that the O.P.No.2 and 3 are liable for the defect in instrument.  The O.P.No.1 received the payment from the complainant.  Therefore, all the opponents are liable for payment to the complainant.  The evidence produced by the complainant remained unchallenged.  In spite of notice, the opponents failed to replace the instrument thereby the complainant suffered from mental harassment.  We think compensation of Rs.10,000/- will suffice the purpose.  Besides this, the complainant is entitled for the cost of this proceeding Rs.5,000/-.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed.
2. The opponents are directed to refund Rs.37,000/- (Rs.Thirty Seven Thousand Only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. from 21^st September, 2012 till realization.
3. The opponents are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand Only) to the complainant as compensation towards mental agony.
4. The opponents are also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rs.Five Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this proceeding.
5. The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.
6. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Dictated and Pronounced on 7^th January, 2015