HINDUSTAN ELECTRONICS vs KUNALKANTI SAHA

THE order of the Khurda District Forum directing the appellant to replace the electronic shaver and to pay to the respondent compensation of Rs. 3,000 and cost of Rs. 500 is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.

THE respondent is an officer of the Indian Overseas Bank. He filed the complaint against the appellant alleging deficiency in service. His case is that he purchased one electronic shaver (Braun rechargeable model-5316) from the appellant on 13.2.1999 by paying Rs. 3,700. Immediately after the purchase, when he wanted to use it, he found it to be not properly functioning. He accordingly went to the appellant on several occasions and complained about non-functioning of the shaver. On 1.6.1999, he handed over the shaver to the appellant for getting it repaired. THE appellant however did not repair the shaver nor did he replace the same. Finding no other way, he filed the complaint claiming compensation as well as for replacement of the shaver. THE appellant although received notice did not appear in the District Forum nor did he file any counter. As such, he was set ex parte. The entire allegation of the respondent thus remained uncontroverted. Annexure-1 to the complaint is the receipt, which shows that the respondent purchased the shaver in question from the appellant on payment of consideration of Rs. 3,700. Annexure-2 to the complaint is another receipt granted by the appellant. It shows that the shaver in question was received on his behalf for getting it repaired. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant got the shaver repaired nor did he take steps to replace it with a new one. From the above, there is no doubt that the respondent is a consumer who purchased the shaver on payment of rupees 3,700 and because of the defect in the shaver, he deposited it with the appellant for repair. Neither the shaver was repaired nor was it replaced by a new one. In the circumstances, the District Forum has rightly directed the appellant to replace the shaver with new one. The callousness with which the appellant dealt with the matter gives rise to compensation and the District Forum has, therefore, rightly directed him to pay compensation as well as cost of litigation.

In view of what has been stated above, we do not find any merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. The appellant is hereby directed to comply the order of the District Forum by 31.7.2006, failing which action under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall be taken against him. Records received from the District Forum may be sent back forthwith. Mr. Subash Mahtab, Member- I agree. Appeal dismissed.