A PERUMAL Vs. VELWYN TELEVISION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against the order dated 27.2.1993 of the Kerala State Commission at Thiruvananthapuram declining to proceed with the complaint by accepting the stand of the Opposite Parties that adjudication of the complaint involves voluminous evidence and expert opinion which can be entertained only in a Civil Court.

(2.) THERE is a delay of 11 days in filing this appeal which is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay together with an affidavit of Shri A. Perumal, Appellant No. 1. The certified copy of the order dated 27.2.1993 was issued to the Counsel for the Appellants only on 2.3.1993. The Appellants despatched the appeal through Speed Post on 30th March, 1993 within the limitation period and the delay caused in receiving the appeal by the Registry of this Commission is because of the delay in transit. We, therefore, find sufficient cause and condone the delay of 11 days. 2. The Appellants herein are the Complainants before the State Commission and are the husband, children and mother of the deceased Janaki Devi who had purchased a Dynora T.V. Model No. 491 of the 1st Opposite Party from the 2nd Opposite Party. The T.V. set was under a warranty that the "Television set is free from defect in materials and workmanship. It is alleged that on 4.12.1990 while touching the antenna of T.V. set for adjustment, Janaki Devi received electric shock from the antenna, that the capacitors used by Opposite Party No. 1 were of low quality and the touch caused the failure of the capacitor, that this produced an electric current of high intensity giving electric shock through, antenna to Janaki Devi resulting in her death. It is stated that the Electrical Inspector has enquired into the fatal accident and found the accident was due to defective T.V. set in which low quality capacitors was used Opposite Parties. The Complainants claimed that due to negligence of Opposite Parties in supplying defective goods, the Complainants have suffered loss and damages and claimed an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- under different heads. The 1st Opposite Party raised the preliminary plea that a complaint of this nature which involves voluminous evidence and expert opinion, can be entertained only by a Civil Court besides taking the stand that there is no manufacturing defect in the T.V. set or that the accident occurred due to any defective goods.

(3.) THE impugned orders are set aside and the case remanded back to the State Commission for proceeding with the complaint on merits. There will be no order as to the costs of the proceedings before this Commission.