AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS appeal has been directed by the opposite parties against order dated 31. 1. 2007 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U. T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum), vide which complaint of respondent (complainant) was accepted and the appellants were directed to pay an amount of Rs. 29,500 with interest @ 6% from the date of passing of order till payment i. e. Rs. 17,500 being the price of A. C. supplied, Rs. 10,000 as compensation for mental and physical harassment and Rs. 2,000 as costs of litigation.
BRIEFLY stated the facts are that respondent (complainant) had purchased one Electrolux Air conditioner from M/s. Paras Enterprises- appellant No. 2 for Rs. 17,500 vide receipt dated 5. 4. 2006 Annexure A-2 and respondent was assured that he would not face any problem regarding maintenance of AC and he was entitled to four free services for one year from the date of purchase upto 4. 4. 2007. However, after one month of the purchase, AC started giving problem and on 19. 5. 2006 the wife of respondent requested appellant No. 1 M/s. Supreme Electro-Mech to send some service engineer to rectify the fault and appellant promised that service engineer would visit the next day on 20. 5. 2006 between 2 to 5 p. m. but no body turned up and on 22/23. 5. 2006 respondent again requested appellant No. 1 to send some service engineer to rectify the fault. However, one service engineer turned up at 10. 00 p. m. i. e. at odd time for rectifying the fault and since, wife of respondent was asleep she told the service engineer to rectify the fault in the next morning and thereafter no body turned up. Respondent even got served legal notice but to no effect. Alleging deficiency in service, the complaint was filed.
Appellants were duly served but no body turned up, hence, they were proceeded against ex parte.
RESPONDENT produced his affidavit and documents on file. After hearing Counsel for complainant, the complaint was accepted with costs vide order dated 31. 1. 2007 by the District Consumer Forum.
AGGRIEVED by the said order, opposite parties have filed the present appeal. We have heard Counsel for appellants Mr. Munish Kumar and carefully gone through the file. The copy of the invoice Annexure A-1 shows that respondent had purchased one AC from M/s. Paras Enterprises, appellant No. 2 for a sum of Rs. 17,500 and vide Annexure A-2 appellant No. 2 had received a sum of Rs. 17,500. Annexure A-3 is copy of the notice dated 4. 7. 2006 served upon appellants but they did not give any reply. There is affidavit of respondent also on the file.
COUNSEL for appellants contended that appellants were not duly served. However, a perusal of interim orders of the District Consumer Forum shows that appellant No. 1 was served for 4. 12. 2006 and appellant No. 2 was served for 17. 1. 2007 through courier service but none appeared on their behalf, hence, they were proceeded against ex parte. The very fact that they did not appear nor send any reply to the legal notice shows that they had got nothing to say about the AC which had become defective after one month of its purchase. There is no question of any violation of principles of natural justice because due notice was given to appellants and they did not elect to appear and to contest complaint. Therefore, District Consumer Forum had rightly ordered to refund Rs. 17,500 as price of AC subject to return of AC. As the AC was found to be defective and since respondent had suffered mental and physical harassment as he could not enjoy the benefit of AC, so, appellants had been rightly burdened to pay Rs. 10,000 as compensation besides costs of Rs. 2,000.
THUS, we do not find any infirmity in the order of District Consumer Forum and consequently, appeal is dismissed in limine. Copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. Appeal dismissed.