Kerala

Idukki

CC/66/2019

Eldose Kuriakkose - Complainant(s)

Versus

Nanthileth G mart Global electronics - Opp.Party(s)

29 Nov 2019

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 26.3.2019

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 29^th day of November, 2019

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

SMT. ASAMOL. P MEMBER

CC NO.66/2019

Between

Complainant : Eldose Kuriakose,

Thazhathukudi House,

Anaviratti, Vellathooval, Idukki.

And

Opposite Parties : 1. Nandilath G mart,

Global Electronics and Home

Appliances Plaza,

Perumpillil Arcade,

Vengallur, Thodupuzha, Idukki.

(By Adv: Shiji Joseph)

2. Micromax Informatic Ltd.,

288 A, Phase 4,

Gurgaon, Hariyana.

O R D E R

SMT. ASAMOL. P., MEMBER

 

Case of the complainant is that :

 

On 2.5.2017, the complainant purchased an LED TV of Micromax for Rs.20,800/- from opposite party and also opposite party has given 3 year warranty for the TV. But from 2018 December onwards, the TV was defective. The complainant informed the 1^st opposite party about the defect of the TV. But opposite party did not rectify the defect till the date. It is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence they are liable to rectify the defect or refund the price of the product and also compensate the damages and hardships suffered by the complainant. So the complainant approached the Forum against the acts of opposite parties.

 

Notice served to opposite parties. 1^st opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed detailed reply version. Additional 2^nd opposite party not appeared before the Forum and hence made exparte.

 

First opposite party filed reply version and it is submitted that they have only dealership of the product and manufacturer is liable to rectify or replace

(cont....2)

- 2 -

the product within the warranty period. The opposite party also submitted that it is the service after sales which is to be done by the manufacturer and 1^st opposite party has no role in it. Additional 2^nd opposite party is the manufacturer of the product hence they are liable. Notice served to additional 2^nd opposite party. But 2^nd opposite party did not appear before the Forum. Hence they called absent, set exparte.

 

The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

 

The complainant has produced two documents. The copy of purchase bill and copy of warranty card were marked as Exts.P1 and P2 respectively.

 

The POINT :- The complainant alleges that he purchased an LED TV of Micromax from 1^st opposite party. It is admitted by the 1^st opposite party in their version. The purchase bill and warranty card produced by the complainant before the Forum. Regarding the documents, the complainant purchased the product and it has warranty also. 1^st opposite party filed reply version and it is submitted that they are only the dealer of the product and manufacturer is liable to the product. Additional 2^nd opposite party not appeared before the Forum.

 

Hence the complaint allowed. The Forum directs the additional 2^nd opposite party to replace the product or refund the price of the product and also directed to pay Rs.3000/- as compensation to the petitioner within 30 days of the receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default, till its realisation.

 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29^th day of November, 2019

Sd/-

SMT. ASAMOL. P., MEMBER

Sd/-

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR, PRESIDENT

 

APPENDIX

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Copy of bill. Forwarded by Order,

Ext.P2 - Copy of warranty card.

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT