BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FEROZEPUR.
C.C. No.730 of 2011 Date of Institution: 26.11.2011
Suraj Parkash Bhalla, aged 45 years, son of Pyare Lal, resident of Inside Amritsari Gate, Bhalla Flour Mills, Ferozepur City.
1. Lucky Radio’s & Sewing Machines, Authorized Retail & Distributors, 70-B, Sadar Bazar No.4, Ferozepur Cantt.
2. Videocon Industries Limited, SCO 94, Urban Estate, Phase-1 Dugri, Near M.G.M. School, Ludhiana.
3. Videocon Industries Limited, Central Service Operation, 15, KM Stone, Aurangabad-Paithan Road, Village Chitegaon, TalPaithan, District Aurangabad-431105 (M.S.) INDIA, Tel.91-2431-251507-251584, 251598, Fax.91-2431-251571.
…….. Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
G. P. SINGH, PRESIDENT:-
As per averments, complainant Suraj Parkash Bhalla purchased a color TV make Videocon Model 8600QS on 26.11.2008 from opposite party No.1 for Rs.13,000/-. At the time of said purchase, opposite party No.1 also gave a Maano Ya Na Manno offer-2008 to the complainant and as per the said offer, it was mentioned that by participating in the said offer and purchasing Videocon product 34’FLAT TV Model No.8600QS for Rs.12,990/- against rendering services from the Videocon Company to get one Plasma TV 32(81 cm) Entitlement certificate and the company will give one Plasma 32 TV (81cm) after completion of 2 years 11 months from the date of purchase of 34 FLAT TV & deposit plasma the 32 TV. So, the complainant purchased the said TV for Rs.13,000/- and also deposited Rs.7000/- for the said offer. After 2 years and 11 months, when the complainant demanded the said assured 32(81cm) Plasma TV from the opposite parties, opposite party No.1 refused to attend the complainant and told the complainant to visit the Branch Office of Videocon Company at SCO 94, Urban Estate Phase-I, Dugri near MGM School, Ludhiana i.e. opposite party No.2. When the complainant contacted opposite party No.2, he was told that the said Plasma TV is not manufactured by the company and offered to give him a new LCD TV in place of Plasma TV on payment of another Rs.7000/- stating that the price of the said LCD TV 3204-FD model is Rs.30,000/-. The complainant deposited Rs.7000/- in the name of Videocon Industries Limited by way of DD No.674300 dated 14.9.2011 and on deposit the said amount, opposite party No.2 issued a certificate to the complainant regarding the said offer and as per the said offer, the LCD TV was to be delivered to the complainant within 30 days. Thereafter, despite repeated requests, the said LCD TV has not been given to the complainant. So, the complainant has prayed for issuance of directions to the opposite parties to pay Rs.30,000/- to the complainant of the said offer alongwith interest and Rs.60,000/- as compensation alongwith any other suitable relief.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed their respective written statements. Opposite party No.1 has admitted the claim of the complainant alongwith receipt of additional deposit of Rs.7000/- for participating in the scheme of the company at the time of purchase of the TV in November, 2008, but denied his liability stating that opposite party No.1 has left the dealership of the company and opposite party No.2 and 3 are liable to comply with the scheme.
3. Opposite party No.2 and 3, in their joint written statement, have totally denied all the averments of the complaint. The receipt of Rs.7000/- on 14.9.2011 has been admitted stating that at the time of purchase of TV, the complainant has not deposited the said amount and has now deposited after expiry of the scheme. Even the visit of the complainant to opposite party No.2 has been denied and pleading no liability, dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
4. Parties led evidence,
5. We have heard the parties and have also gone through the record, documents and evidence placed on the file and our findings on the matter in dispute are as under :-
6. Opposite party No.1 has admitted the claim of the complainant. Opposite party No.1 is also present before this Forum today and stated that the amount of Rs.7000/- was immediately sent to the company in the month of November, 2011 and the denial of the company is wrongful. The copy of Maano Ya Na Maano Offer form with application No.169872 dated 26.11.2008 is Ex. C-3 on the file. The copy of entitlement certificate of Plasma 32 (81cm) TV after 2 years 11 months of the purchase of the Jumbo 34 FLAT CTV is Ex C-4 on the file.
7. After hearing the arguments, we opted to study about the scheme of the company from the website of the company at Internet, but we are surprised to note that there are lot of complaints against the Videocon company about their cheating the innocent people under the said Maano Ya na Manno scheme. We will like to reproduce one complaint posted at by one Vinayak Gupta on 20.3.2011 at the following link :-
Videocon Mano Ya Na Mano Offer
An absolute cheat concept, Videocon has succumbed to cheap money making business. I am a resident of Vishrantwadi, Pune. Bought a VidoeconJumbo 34 inches TV from Vishrantwadi, Pune on 3rd March 2008. The scheme name was Mano Ya Na Mano Offer, under which we had to purchase a 34 inches Jumbo tv worth Rs.12990/- and a certificate for Rs.7000/- stating that after 35 months of the billing date, we have to deposit the documents to the Showroom dealer at Vishrantwadi, Pune or Videocon company to redeem a Videocon Plasma 32 inches screen absolutely FREE OF COST in lieu of that certificate. The dealer had taken the original cash receipt and gave the certificate, and said that the certificate would suffice the redemption ,but when i went to the showroom he is asking for original receipts besides the Videocon website today, they have added a page for the same scheme stating that we have to pay another rs.4980/- in order to redeem the Plasma screen and even they are saying that the Plasma screen is without AV-in function and even without a REMOTE. No body, now a days, can even think about a TV without a remote. People in India had their blind faith in Videocon company and invested their Rs.7000/- without any hesitation and Videocon is doing such cheap stunts. I will never buy a Videocon product ever in my life, and will never recommend anyone buying Videocon products. Even the actors who are endorsing such products should be aware of fraudulent activities. I am disappointed , and I don’t know how will I get my money back. Another blow by Videocon is that, their customer services dont have the information about local dealers, moreover their customer complaint site:
http://www.servicedelight.com/indexnets.htm doesn’t work. WHAT A SHAME.
Posted 20th March 2011 by Vinayak Gupta
Various complaints are also available on the following links :-
a) . http://www.indiaconsumerforum.org/?p=8439
All the above facts and complaints lying on the various sites shows unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties at large. Nothing regarding the scheme is available on the website of the company i.e. at http://www.videoconworld.com/
8. Opposite party No.2 and 3 have not denied the scheme in their written statement. As per condition No.6 of terms and conditions printed at the backside of the Plasma 32 (81 CM) Entitlement Certificate Ex. C-4, the Videocon also voluntarily offers premature Plasma 32 TV Entitlement Options to the purchasers of Jumbo 34 Flat CTV under Maano Ya Na Maano Offer such as ;
A ) After completion of 1 year ( 12 months ) from the date of purchase of Jumbo 34 Flat CTV, pay Rs.18990/- and surrender the Plasma Entitlement Certificate and take a Plasma 32 TV 981CM).
B ) After completion of 2 year ( 24 months ) from the date of purchase of Jumbo 34 Flat CTV, pay Rs.14990/- and surrender the Plasma Entitlement Certificate and take a Plasma 32 TV 981CM).
C ) After completion of 2 years & 11 months ( 35 months ) from the date of purchase of Jumbo 34 Flat CTV, just surrender the Plasma Entitlement Certificate in original and get Plasma 32 TV 981CM).
So, as per scheme, after expiry of 35 months i.e. after 2 years and 11 months, the company was bound to deliver a Plasma 32 (81 cm) TV to the complainant, but opposite party No.2 has wrongly and illegally charged Rs.7,000/- from the complainant, but even then failed to deliver the Plasma 32 (81 cm) TV to the complainant and at last, the complainant was left with no option, but to file the present complaint. Even after filing the complaint, opposite party No.2 and 3 have adopted a negative attitude and wrongly and malafidely denied the claim of the complainant in their written statement.
9. Since opposite party No.1 has discharged its liability by sending the amount of Rs.7000/- as per scheme to the company and as such, no case deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 is made out. So, the complaint against the opposite party No.1 is hereby dismissed and in view of the above discussion, this complaint is accepted against opposite party No.2 and 3 with Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses. Opposite party No.2 and 3 are also directed to refund the amount of 7,000/- received in excess from the complainant and to deliver him the LCD Plasma 32 (81cm) TV. In case the said model is not available with opposite party No.2 and 3, the other 32 (81 CM) of the same configuration be delivered to the complainant. This order is directed to be complied with within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which opposite party No.2 and 3 shall be liable to pay extra amount of Rs.30,000/- as cost of the said assured TV of 32 (81 cm) in addition to the amount of compensation, litigation expenses as well as of Rs.7000/-, as ordered above, and in that case the amount of award, expect the amount of compensation and litigation expenses, shall also fetch interest @ 9% per annum from 26.11.2011 i.e. from the date of filing of complaint till its actual payment to the complainant. File be consigned to the record room.
(G.P. Singh) President
(Tarlok Singh) Member