Kerala

StateCommission

A/669/2017

SAFFEEQ M P - Complainant(s)

Versus

SONY CENTRE - Opp.Party(s)

PARTY IN PERSON

10 Nov 2017

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SISUVIHARLANE VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL.NO.669/2017

 JUDGMENT DATED :10.11.2017

(Appeal filed against the order in CC.No.462/2014 on the file of CDRF, Kozhikode, order dated : 10.08.2017)

 

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI.S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN          : PRESIDENT

SRI.V.V.JOSE                                                   : MEMBER

APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT

                   Safeeq M.P,

                   Puthiyarakkal House, Kunnamangalam (MIE) P.O,

                   Kozhikode-673 571

         

                             (Party in person)

 

RESPONDENTS/OPPOSITE PARTIES

1.  Sony Centre, Fridge House Retail Pvt. Ltd,

Opp. Malabar Christian College,

Kannur Road, Kozhikode-673 001

2. Sony India Branch Office,
3.  

Kadavanthara, Cochin-682 020

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN: PRESIDENT

Complainant is the appellant.  His complaint for refund of value of an audio system, Rupees twenty six thousand nine hundred with compensation, from opposite parties, after enquiry, was dismissed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum for short  “district forum”, Kozhikode.  Aggrieved he has preferred this appeal.

          2.Case of the complainant in brief was that he purchased an audio system paying a sum of Rupees Twenty six thousand nine hundred from first opposite party on  assurance given that the system has karaoke facilities.  However, later, when he checked the system he found that it cannot be used for karaoke performance.  Opposite parties filed version disputing the case of complainant contending that he had purchased  the audio system after proper checking. A week after the purchase he made some complaints and it was attended to by service engineer.  The system had no manufacturing defect, and, the case developed over absence of karaoke performance to claim refund was baseless, according to opposite parties.

          3.  Evidence consisted of testimony of complainant as PW.1 and Exts.A1 to A5 on his side.  No evidence was let in by opposite parties.

          4.  The district forum appreciating the materials found no merit in the complaint and it was dismissed.

          5.  We heard complainant who appeared in person over the admissibility of appeal against the Order of the district forum dismissing his complaint.  His case is that the system does not have bass treble equalizer  adjustments when mike is used for karaoke.  At the time of purchase the dealer had assured the system has karaoke facilities, according to him.  Among the records produced by complainant  Ext.A3  is the brochure  of the audio system purchased by complainant.  Complainant has no case that brochure contained anything about the availability of bass/treble equalizer adjustments to the system.  Without  looking into the brochure he made the purchase of system cannot be believed. If at all he wanted an audio system which is having karaoke performance naturally before purchase he should have checked the system.  The dealer had no mike for checking the system to find out whether the system has karaoke performance is hardly susceptible.  Evidently nonavailability of bass/treble equalizer adjustments in the system to perform karaoke has been invented by complainant for refund of purchase price paid  for the system from opposite parties.  Complaint was rightly and correctly dismissed by district forum and  order of dismissal does not suffer from any infirmity.

          In the result, appeal is dismissed as not admitted.

 

JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN:  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V.JOSE                            :  MEMBER

pr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE KERALA STATE              CONSUMER DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSIION

VAZHUTHACAUDE,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

 

 

 

 

          JUDGMENT IN  A.669/2017

         DATED : 10.11.2017