On 2.7.2014, complainant Vijay Taneja purchased a Split A.C. 1.5 T183CY, vide bill No.9555 (Ex.C-1)   for  Rs.27,500/-  from M/s City Enterprises, Hisar i.e. from opposite party No.1.  It was with the  warranty of one year for the A.C. and warranty of four years for its compressor.  It was manufactured by Voltas Limited i.e. opposite party No.3.  M/s. Neelam Electronics, Hisar i.e. opposite party No.2 is the service centre of the Company.  But within one week of its installation,  on 7.7.2014,  it was  found that it  was not giving effective cooling, so on the same day,  he made complaint No. 14070701155, with the opposite parties upon which their  engineer  visited the house of the complainant and on 11.7.2014, replaced  the compressor of the A.C. But  still the problem continued, so the  complainant visited the shop of opposite party No.1 and then  made several complaints No.14072401956 dated 24.7.2014,  14072800417 dated 4.8.2014 and 14080604532  dated 6.8.2014 but to no effect. He then   sent legal notice dated 27.8.2014 to the opposite parties but it also remained unreplied; hence, this complaint, filed on  07.10.2014,  for  a direction to the opposite parties, for replacement of the Air conditioner or in alternative, for the refund of its price of Rs.27,500/- with upto date interest,  besides damages for his harassment, humiliation etc. and litigation expenses.

2.       Opposite parties have been    duly proceeded against ex-parte vide order of this forum dated 05.02.2015.

3.       In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Ex.CW1/A his own supporting affidavit. Ex.C-1  copy of purchased invoice dated 2.7.2014 and Ex.C-2 copy of service centre report,  for changing the compressor on  dated 11.7.2014 as it  was not cooling. Besides it, the  complainant has  also placed on record copy of his legal notice dated 27.8.2014  and copies of its postal receipts.

4.       There is no reason to disbelieve or to discredit   aforesaid  pleaded  case of the complainant, which gets full support and corroboration  not only from his own affidavit Ex.CW1/A  but  also from copy of purchase  bill  dated 2.7.2014 and copy of service centre report Ex.C-2.  Case of the complainant also inspires confidence,  because  the opposite parties have opted for being proceed ex-parte and   they also opted not to  reply the legal

notice of the complainant.  It is pertinent to mention that opposite parties had to change the compressor of the A.C. within about 10 days of its purchase, but even then changed compressor did not work. The A.C. was still not giving cooling. His various complaints also remained unattended and  unreplied. There is thus presumption against the opposite parties.  It is thus amply proved that a defective Split A.C. was  sold to the complainant which  was not giving adequate cooling. Its compressor was replaced but it also  did not work subsequent complaints of the complainant were  also not attended to. Even his  legal notice remained unreplied.  All these acts and conducts on the part of the opposite parties  are not only gross deficiency of service,  but are  also of un fair trade practice on their  part. It goes without saying that the complainant must have  suffered  a lot in one full summer season and now  is also undergoing same problem in this  second summer season, as well, for no fault of his own but only because of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.

5.       Resultantly, this complaint is hereby allowed, with a direction to the opposite parties, to immediately replace the Split Air conditioner in question, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of  copy of this order, for which the  opposite parties shall given written notice to the complainant to collect it.  Otherwise, to refund its price of Rs.27,500/- to the complainant with interest @ 10% per annum, from the date of  sale i.e. 2.7.2014 till payment. Complainant is also hereby awarded compensation of Rs.8000/- for his harassment, mental agony etc. and litigation expenses of Rs.500/- against the opposite parties. All the opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable to comply the order.   However, primary responsibility to comply the order, shall be of opposite party No.3 being the manufacturing company. In case compliance  of the order  is made by opposite party No.1or  by opposite party No.2,  as the case may be, then the complying party shall be  duly indemnified  by  opposite party No. 3,  with interest @ 10% per annum.

Announced.                                                        

18.05.2015.