A-2116/2017

14-07-2023

O R D E R

BY SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Heard from respondent. Appellant not present. Sufficient opportunity provided to submit the arguments on behalf of the appellant, in spite of that, the appellant not present.

2. The learned advocate for respondent submits that the complainant had not rendered the refrigerator before the authorized service station for inspection to know whether there is any defect in the refrigerator. In spite of that, the complainant directly filed a complaint alleging unfair trade practice on the part of this respondent in selling a defective refrigerator. The District Commission after trial had dismissed the complaint holding that there is no any deficiency in service/unfair trade practice on the part of this respondent. Hence prays to dismiss the appeal also. 

3. On perusal of the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, the complainant alleged unfair trade practice on the part of this respondent for selling a defective refrigerator and he filed a complaint stating that one of the technician was attended the refrigerator who has given opinion that there is a defect in the refrigerator. But this respondent has not rectified the defects, in spite of request made by the complainant, hence prayed for replacement of the refrigerator.

4. The District Commission after trial dismissed the complaint holding that, the complainant had not produced any materials to show that the refrigerator was tendered for service or for any inspection to find out there is any manufacturing defect.  Of course, we agree the order passed by the District Commission and the argument submitted by the learned advocate for respondent. The complainant ought to produce the refrigerator to the authorized service centre of the respondent to find out the defects noticed by the complainant in the refrigerator. In the absence of such materials, the complainant cannot allege an unfair trade practice on the part of this respondent. The complainant had not made any attempts during course of trial to appoint any expert to know the defect in the alleged refrigerator. In the absence of such also the complainant cannot allege unfair trade practice. The complainant fails to establish the defect in the refrigerator. Mere filing a complaint before the District Commission is not suffice to establish unfair trade practice on the part of this respondent. The complainant ought to establish the alleged unfair trade practice by producing cogent evidence and required documents, but the complainant fails. As such the order passed by the District Commission does not require any interference. Accordingly the appeal is also dismissed and we proceed to pass the following:-

O R D E R

The appeal is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.

Member                                    Judicial Member

Jrk/-