N. SYAMASUNDARAN Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, TATA SKY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner N. Syamasundaran against the order dated 18.11.2015 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka, (in short 'the State Commission') passed in Appeal No.820 of 2013.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition are that the petitioner had one Tata Sky connection and his set-top box was not functioning properly and after complaint, the same was replaced by the opposite party. After sometime, the replaced set-top box also became faulty and the petitioner could not utilise his Tata Sky connection. The grievance of the complainant in the complaint is that no proper response was given by the persons of the opposite party and the set top box was not replaced. He requested for disconnection of the Tata Sky connection and wanted the remaining amount in his account to be paid to him.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the opposite party on the ground that set top box was purchased from a third party vendor and therefore, Tata Sky did not have any responsibility to replace the same. As a goodwill gesture, they replaced set top box once but, it is not their responsibility to replace the set top box every time. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal, Forum, Bangalore, (in short 'the District Forum') dismissed the complaint vide its order dated 03.05.2013. The complainant preferred an appeal before the State Commission which was also dismissed vide its order dated 18.11.2015.