OPTONICA KALYANI SHARP INDIA LTD. Vs. GOPAL LAKHOTIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful opposite parties 1 and

(2.) in O.P. No. 626/1994 on the file of the District Consumer Forum -II, Hyderabad, are the appellants before this Commission. The facts in brief are that an Optonica Colour T.V. manufactured by opposite parties 1 and 2 was purchased by the complainant on 15.11.1990 through the third opposite party, and it was burnt due to voltage flunctuations on 8.11.1992. The complainant gave it for repairs to the servicing centre of opposite parties 1 and 2 on 9.11.1992 and obtained a receipt, Ex. A -3. Repairs were estimated at Rs. 9,000/ - and for replacement of the colour tube at Rs. 7,850/ - which is more than the cost of T.V. 2. The grievance of the complainant is that opposite parties 1 and 2 widely advertised that the Optonica Colour T.V. is the product of a joint venture of Sharp Corporation, a Japanese concern, and is having in -built stabilizer system, and voltage fluctuation is no problem, and that no separate voltage stabilizer was required. Having seen the advertisement, the complainant approached the third opposite party who has also confirmed that no additional stabilizer is required. On believing his representation, the complainant purchased the T.V. and started using it without a stabilizer, but on 8.11.1992 it was burnt.

(3.) The opposite parties demanded payment of repair charges, but the complainant insisted for free repairs, as opposite parties 1 and 2 have advertised that the T.V. can withstand any voltage fluctuations and no extra stabilizer is necessary, and as the opposite parties failed to rectify the defects, the complainant approached the District Forum. The opposite parties filed written version stating that the T.V. contained an inbuilt stabilizer which could withstand the fluctuations in electricity between 130 to 280 volts, and that if the fluctuations are higher, the T.V. would burn and the damage being due to a third partys negligence, and it having occurred after the lapse of warranty period of one year, no liability can be fastened to it for free repairs and replacement or refund of the price of the T.V. muchless the compensation of Rs. 20,000/ - and payment of Rs. 20,000/ - to enable the complainant to purchase an alternate T.V. in the present day market.