SHANTI SEEDS Vs. HIRA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U. T. , Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 10.2.2005 in Complaint Case No.674 of 2003, Col. A. S. Vaid V/s. Goyal Autolines and Others.

(2.) In brief, the case of the appellant/complainant is that he purchased an AIWA 530m Card Audio System for his new Indica Car from OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.14,900 on 5.9.2001 and fitted the same in his new Indica car. Copy of the bill has been attached as Annexure C-1 with the complaint and the guarantee card is Annexure C-2 of the complaint. It is averred that within six months of its use, the car audio system started giving trouble by showing Error 3 on the cassette/cd player. Due to exigency of service, the complainant could take the audio system for repair to the authorized dealer i. e. , OP No.2 in March 2002. The audio system was accepted for repairs and the complainant was asked to collect it after two weeks. The complainant was told that the warranty is only for six months and not for one year. The complainant then wrote to OP No.3 at Delhi for replacing the audio system but no action was taken. A legal notice dated 6.1.2003 was also served on respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 but that also elicited no response. The warranty card at Annexure C-2 clearly indicates that the date of purchase of the audio system is 5.9.2001 and the expiry date of the warranty is 4.9.2002 and it was well within the warranty period that the car audio system was taken to the workshop of OP No.2. Since the OPs took no action, the complaint was instituted praying that either the car stereo be replaced or its cost i. e. , Rs.14,900 be refunded to the complainant along with costs to be imposed on the OPs for mental torture and harassment.

(3.) Op No.1 in reply stated that since the goods was not sold by them to the complainant through bill in question and no warranty was given to the complainant, the answering OP is not liable to either repair the audio system or refund its price. It was also pleaded that the complainant is not a consumer qua answering OP.