ANAND MOHAN MALIK Vs. JAISWAL ELECTRONICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case called out. None responds on behalf of the appellant/complainant whose complaint was dismissed by virtue of the impugned judgment.

(2.) MR . R K Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent is present. Since it is an old appeal, we deem it appropriate to decide it on merit.

(3.) A small issue is involved in the present litigation and it pertains to the alleged manufacturing defect in the inverter battery purchased by the complainant from Jaiswal Electronics. Whereas it was pleaded in the complaint that there was a manufacturing defect in the battery, the respondent submitted that the terms and conditions as recited in the warranty card were not followed by the complainant and it was on account of the noncompliance of the written conditions that the battery had gone out of order. It is important to note that the complainant had not relied upon any expert opinion by means of which he could have proved manufacturing defect in the battery. The respondent had made a specific averment that the kind of defect the battery had suffered from was on account of non -filling of the water or filling of contaminated water. The mere fact that the battery was not functioning properly was not enough for the complainant to claim replacement thereof. He should have established by means of cogent and convincing evidence that there was a manufacturing defect in it. Also he was required to establish that he had followed all the terms and conditions recited in the warranty card. Since he failed to substantiate his complaint, it was rightly dismissed by the District Consumer Forum. We do not find any good ground or cogent reason to record a different finding.