ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.75 of 2024 Date of institution : 22.01.2024 Reserved on : 18.04.2024 Date of decision : 02.05.2024 M/s Hear Clear Mohali, Shop No.4, 1^st Floor, Homeland Height, Sector

70, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-160071.

…..Appellant/Opposite Party Versus Daljit Singh Rattan, Kothi No.902, Phase 3 B-2, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab.

…..Respondent/complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 04.10.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SAS Nagar (Mohali), in CC/317/2023 Quorum:-

Mr. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Argued by:-

For the appellant : Sh. S.S.Gill, Advocate For respondent : Sh. R.K. Verma, Authorized Representative KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party against the impugned order dated 04.10.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) (in short, now “the District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite party (in short ‘OP’), under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, was allowed and the following relief has been granted:

“6. Consequently, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of this case, we partly allow the complaint and direct the OP to refund an amount of Rs.60,000/- to the complainant along with 9% per annum from the date of receipt i.e.27.01.2022 within a period of 30 days, failing which this amount will carry interest @12 % p.a. till actual refund. The OP is further directed to pay amount of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses”.

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal are that the complainant purchased a hearing aid device from the OP on 27.01.2022 for a sum of Rs.60,000/-. However, after few days, the said hearing aid device started giving problem and the OP rectified it. But again after few days, it started giving problem and the complainant again approached the OP for its rectification. The OP kept the same with it and assured the complainant that the defected hearing aid device would be replaced with new one. Thereafter, the complainant requested the OP several times either to replace the same with new one or to refund the amount. But the OP failed to redress his grievance. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Commission and sought directions against the OP to refund the amount of device along with interest and also to pay compensation for mental agony, harassment, and negligence as well as litigation expenses.

4. The complaint was contested by the OP, who filed written reply and raised certain preliminary objection, which are not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity. On merits, the OP stated that the complainant visited the OP on 19.01.2022 and after three days home trial with demo device, he purchased Horizon 1XRIC-S from it, on 27.01.2022. The total sale price of the product was Rs.1,00,000/- but the same was sold to the complainant at Rs.60,000/- after giving 40% discount considering the age of complainant and as a goodwill gesture. After about 4 months of purchase of the product in question, the complainant started alleging problems in the device and the same was sent to the manufacturer for checking but no defect was found in the device and the same was returned to the complainant. The complainant again reported the problem but again on checking, no defect was found. However, as a goodwill gesture, the OP replaced the hearing aid device. The complainant on various occasions was advised to get the wax cleaned from the ears from an ENT specialist as every time the complainant alleged defect in th