DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE

PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB          : PRESIDENT

Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) :  MEMBER

Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER

Thursday the 26^th day of October 2023

C.C.567/2015

Complainant

        Rudran,

         S/o. Gopalan,

         Gokulam (HO),

          P.O. Kongannur, Atholi,

          Koilandi Taluk,

          Kozhikide - 673315

Opposite Parties

1.   Sales Manager,

Sri. I.T. Products,

Darusalam Complex,

Room No. 19/20/21,Mavoor Road,

             Kozhikode

2.    The Manager,

Epson India Corporate Office,

Bangalore, 12^th Floor,

The Millenia, Tower A,

No.1, Murphy Road,

             Ulsoor,

Bangalore – 560008,

State of Karnataka

               (By Adv. Sri. Shamjith.G.B)

ORDER

By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN  – PRESIDENT         

This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows: 

For taking colour print on synthetic paper, on 10/10/2015 the complainant purchased Epson printer L 220 from the first opposite party paying Rs. 10,100/-. At the

time of purchase, the first opposite party had assured that colour print could be taken using the printer on all types of paper.  But contrary to the assurance, colour print could not be taken on synthetic paper. This was reported to the first opposite party. But the first opposite party neither attended the complaint nor replaced the printer in spite of repeated requests. Hence the complaint to get a printer capable of taking colour print on synthetic paper or  refund of the purchase price.

3. The second opposite party was impleaded as per order in IA No.16/2016.
4. The first opposite party was set ex-parte. The second opposite party has filed written version.
5. The second opposite party, who is the manufacturer, has denied all the allegations and claims made against them in the complaint. According to the second opposite party, they never assured in their advertisement that synthetic paper can be used in the printer for taking colour print. As per the brochure, A4 plain paper and premium glossy photo paper can be used for printing. The complainant never approached them with any complaint. There is no deficiency of   service on their part. With the above contentions, the second opposite party prays for dismissal of the complaint with costs.      
6. The points that arise for determination in this complaint are:
   1. Whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, as alleged? 
   2. Reliefs and costs.
7. Evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts A1 and A2 on the side of the complainant. Though the senior executive officer of the second opposite party has filed affidavit, he did not make himself available for cross examination and evidence was closed.
8. Both sides remained absent continuously and no arguments were advanced.  
9. Point No. 1  : The second opposite party is the manufacturer of Epson Printer L 220 and the first opposite party is the dealer. On 10/10/2015 the complainant purchased Epson Printer L 220 from the second opposite party for the purpose of taking colour print on synthetic paper. The grievance of the complainant is that though the first opposite party had assured him that colour print could be taken using Epson printer L220 on all types of paper, it was not possible to take colour print on synthetic paper and so the purpose of the printer is not served. It is also his grievance that there was neglect on the part of the first opposite party to address his concerns over the printer.
10. In order to substantiate his case, the complainant has got himself examined as PW1, who has filed proof affidavit and deposed in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. Ext A1 is the invoice dated 10/10/2015 and Ext A2 is the print taken on synthetic paper.
11. As already stated, only the second opposite party has filed written version and contested the matter. According to the second opposite party, Epson printer L 220 cannot be used for taking colour print on synthetic paper and they have never advertised so and the complainant had never approached them with any such  grievance.
12.    Going by the averments in the complaint, it can be seen that the complainant has no allegation against the second opposite party and no relief is also sought against the second opposite party. His grievance is only against the first opposite party. The specific allegation is that the printer in question was sold to him by the first opposite party stating that colour print could be taken using all types of paper whereas the said printer was not suitable for taking colour print on synthetic paper. The fact that Epson printer L 220 cannot be used for taking colour print on synthetic paper is admitted by the manufacturer. PW1 has asserted that the said printer was sold to him by the first opposite party representing that colour print could be taken on all types of paper. There is no reason to disbelieve PW1.The testimony of PW1 in this regard stands unchallenged. The first opposite party has not turned up to file version. He has not produced any evidence to disprove the averments in the complaint or to rebut  the veracity of the documents  produced and marked on the side of the complainant. There is no contra evidence. It is also in evidence  that there was failure on the part of the first opposite party to attend the grievance of the complainant. Selling the  printer by making false representation and the further neglect to attend the complaint reported by the consumer amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. The complainant purchased the printer for taking colour print on synthetic paper and it was not possible with the printer supplied to him by the first opposite party. So the printer is practically a worthless product as far as the complainant is concerned. The first opposite party is bound to refund the purchase price of the printer after taking it back. The act of the first opposite party has resulted in gross mental agony and hardship to the complainant, for which, he is entitled to be compensated adequately. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 5,000/- will be reasonable compensation in this case. The second opposite party is entitled to be exonerated.
13. Point No. 2:  In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows:

1.  CC 567/2015 is allowed in part.
2. The first opposite party is hereby directed to take back the Epson printer L 220 sold to the complainant as per Ext A1 and refund the purchase price of Rs. 10,100/-(Rupees ten thousand and one hundred only) to the complainant.
3. The first opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
4. The payment as afore stated shall be made within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs. 10,100/- shall carry an interest of 6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
5. The second opposite party is exonerated.
6. No order as to costs.

Pronounced in open Commission on this, the 26^th day of October, 2023.

Date of Filing: 06.11.2015

                             Sd/-                                                           Sd/-                                                                      Sd/-

                      PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                                           MEMBER

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant :

Ext A1 - Invoice dated 10/10/2015

Ext A2 -Print taken on synthetic paper.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties :

Nil.

Witnesses for the Complainant

PW1 -  Rudran  (Complainant)

Witnesses for the opposite parties 

 Nil.

                                   Sd/-                                                   Sd/-                                                               Sd/-

                            PRESIDENT                                       MEMBER                                                   MEMBER

True Copy,      

                                                                                                                                             Sd/-

                                          Assistant Registrar.