SOLIDAIRE INDIA LTD. vs K.INDIRA

THE Opposite Parties 1 and 2 in O.P. No. 360/91 on the file of tile District Forum, Palaghat are the appellants.

THE Complainant purchased a Solidaire Colour T.V. Set from the third Opposite Party on 8.3.89. It went out of order within one week of purchase and continued to be in bad condition, though repair was attended to by the mechanics sent by the second and third Opposite Parties for 11 times between the period of 12.3.89 and 28.3.91. THE last repair/replacement of Video Board PCB was done on 20.7.91 only. THE Complainant refuted the allegation of the Opposite Parties that when the Mechanic approached him for repairing the T.V. Set, she or her husband misbehaved and pushed the mechanic out of their house. She sought compensation for the loss suffered by her due to delay in repairing the T.V. Set by the Opposite Parties and also for mental agony, besides Rs. 500/- towards cost. THE third Opposite Party did not appear or file any objection. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 filed version. According to them the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties only in 1991 and that was the reason for the delay and though the guarantee period was over, they changed the Vedio board and thereafter the set was working well and in the circumstances the complaint is without any merit and is liable to be dismissed.

The District Forum found that the set was out of order within one week of the purchase and it was repaired by a Mechanic of the third Opposite Party on 12.8.89 and it was still not working properly. It had to be repaired 11 times within a period of about 28 months. The third Opposite Party has collected service charges of Rs. 85/- within a week of purchase, though there was a warranty for a period for one year. The District Forum found the T.V. set was properly repaired only when the Consumer Protection Council of Kerala, Palakkad District Unit took up the issue with them. Though the warranty period expired by that time, it is clear from the records available before the District Forum that the set was went out of order within the warranty period itself and it was not properly attended to within the warranty period.

THE District Forum held that the Complainant had mental agony and the Complainant is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 1,000/- on that account. District Forum also ordered refund of Rs. 85/- illegally collected by the third Opposite Party during the period of warranty. In this appeal, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the matter was reported to them only in 1991 and immediately on receipt of the complaint, they attended to the repair and made the T.V. Set alright. He also argued that the Complainant did not co-operate with the Opposite Parties and in the circumstances Forum was not justified in awarding compensation of Rs. 1,000/- to the Complainant.

AS pointed out by the District Forum the set became out of order during the period of warranty. The Complainant approached the third Opposite Party who is the dealer of the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 on 11 occasions to get the set repaired, but they did not attend to repairs properly. Even according to the appellant it was on account of mishandling by the Mechanic of the third Opposite Party, the dealer, the set went out of order. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 cannot shirk their responsibilities by saying that the mistake was committed by the third Opposite Party. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in this contention. There is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 and the award of compensation by the District Forum was fully justified. The appeal is devoid of any merit and it is accordingly dismissed. However, we direct the parties to bear their respective costs. Appeal dismissed.