Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/91/2017

Dheeraj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

19 Apr 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/91/2017
Date  of  Institution	:	31/01/2017
Date   of   Decision	:	19/04/2017

 

 

 

 

 

Dheeraj Kumar son of Sohan Lal, R/o MIG 1328/2, Ph-11, S.A.S. Nagar.

……… Complainant.

Versus

 

1.   Sony India Pvt. Limited, Office: A-31, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi – 110044, through its Managing Director.

 

2.   Modern Sales-22, Office: SCO 1122, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh, through its Partner.

……. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:   SH. S.S. PANESAR             PRESIDENT

SMT.SURJEET KAUR             MEMBER

          SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Dheeraj Kumar, Complainant in person
For OPs	:	Ex-parte.

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, MEMBER

 

          Briefly the facts giving rise to the present Consumer Complaint are that the Complainant purchased one LED TV (Sony Bravia) Model No. KDL-43W800C from Opposite Party No.2 for Rs.66,900/- vide Invoice No. 5184 dated 12.02.2016. It has been alleged that after two months of its purchase, the LED TV in question encountered some problem relating to its Sensor, which fact was also acknowledged by the Service Engineer of the Company, who paid visits to the place of the Complainant consequent upon lodging Complaints to that effect. Thereafter, the Complainant made a request for replacement of the defective LED TV. However, the OP-Company vide e-mail dated 16.5.2016 (Annexure-5) informed him that since only Sensor was required to be change, therefore, it (OP-Company) was unable to exchange the product. Left with no option, the Complainant requested the OP-Company to replace the faulty part (sensor), which was ultimately replaced on 07.10.2016, but to his shock, again the same problem existed in the LED T.V. The Complainant again lodged a Complaint through mail dated 29.11.2016 with a request to replace the faulty LED TV or to return the invoice price of the same, but the OPs refused to accede to his request. Hence, alleging the aforesaid act & conduct of the Opposite Parties as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the Complainant has filed the present Complaint.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte.

 

3.      The complainant led evidence in support of his contentions. 

 

4.      We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the complainant.

 

5.      In the present case, the averments of the complaint have gone unrebutted in the absence of the Opposite Parties who were duly served and preferred neither to appear in person, nor through their Counsel. It is established beyond all reasonable doubt that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. Undoubtedly, the Complainant had spent an amount of Rs.66,900/- to purchase the LED TV (Sony Bravia) in question having faith in the brand and not for running behind the Opposite Parties to get the LED TV repaired/ replaced and then to knock the doors of this Forum for justice. In our opinion due to the irresponsible attitude of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has certainly suffered a lot. We feel that it was the duty of the Opposite Parties to satisfy the Complainant by getting his LED TV (Sony Bravia) repaired in a perfect manner or replace it with a new one, but they have miserably failed to do so. Therefore, the act of the Opposite Parties in not replacing the defective LED TV (Sony Bravia) with a new one and by not responding to the Complaints of the Complainant proves deficiency in service on their part, which certainly has caused immense, mental and physical harassment to the complainant. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against them.

 

6.      In the light of above observations, the present complaint succeeds against the Opposite Parties. The same is allowed qua them. We direct the Opposite Parties as under:- 

(i)  To refund Rs.66,900/- being the invoice price of the LED TV (Sony Bravia) Model No. KDL-43W800C to the complainant.

(ii) To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the unfair trade practice and harassment caused to him.

(iii) To also pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. 

7.      This order be complied with by Opposite Parties, jointly and severally, within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr. No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr. No.(iii) above.
8.      The Complainant shall return the defective LED TV in question to the Opposite Parties after the compliance of the order.
9.      The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

19^th April, 2017                                                     Sd/-

(S.S. PANESAR)

       PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

       MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)                                                                                                      MEMBER