This C.C. is coming on before us for final hearing in the presence of Sri.K.Chandra Sekhara Guptha, Advocate for complainant; complaint against opposite party No.1 & 4 is dismissed; Notice of opposite party No.2 not returned and not claimed; notice of opposite party No.3 served and called absent; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration this forum passed the following:
ORDER
(Per Sri R. Kiran Kumar, Member)
This complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is a resident of Srinagar colony, Khammam. Having attracted with the advertisement of opposite parties, on 29-12-2007 the complainant approached opposite party No.1 and purchased Whirlpool refrigerator of 360 liters with double door for Rs.16,850/- vide cash bill No.5430001392, dt.29-12-2007, the warranty for the said product is 5 years (1+4). As against the assurance given by the opposite party No.1 in respect of 5 years warranty, the refrigerator worked only for two years and since then it is giving troubles, very low cooling. The complainant made a complaint with the opposite party No.1, opposite party No.1 informed the same to opposite party No.4, on such information, opposite party No.4 sent a person who came and attended some repairs on 15-10-2009. Even there is existing of 5 years warranty, opposite party No.4 claimed a bill for Rs.1,850/- for attending of repairs such as replacement of compressor, gas charging, service charges, transplantation of relay ALP and however he made it repair, the refrigerator had functioned only for a few days. Again the complainant made a complaint vide complaint No.500510005375, dt.10-5-2010. Inspite of several efforts and demands made with the opposite parties, for replacement of defective refrigerator, even opposite parties assured to change the refrigerator soon after inspecting the company engineer, no one came to inspect to repair the refrigerator. Vexed with the attitude of the opposite parties, the complainant intends to complaint the same directly to the opposite parties 1 to 3, but to the surprise, opposite party No.1 vacated the shop, as such the complainant made correspondence made with the opposite party No.4, but there was no response from opposite party Nos.1, 2 or 4. Hence the complaint to direct the opposite parties to replace the defective refrigerator by supplying a new qualitative refrigerator or to refund an amount of Rs.16,850/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from 29-12-2007, to refund of Rs.1,850/- collected towards service charges, to award damages of Rs.20,000/- as damages and to award costs of the complaint.
2. In support of his complaint, he himself filed affidavit and filed the following documents, which were marked as Exs.A.1 to A.3.
Ex.A1:- Original bill issued by opposite party No.1, dated 29-12-2007 for
an amount of Rs.16,850/-.
Ex.A2:- User guide & manual of whirlpool refrigerator
Ex.A3:- Cash bill No.418, dt.15-10-2009 for Rs.1,850-00
3. Inspite of receipt of notice, opposite parties 1 to 4 called absent, complaint against opposite parties 1 & 4 is dismissed.
4. Upon perusing the material papers on record, now the points that arose for consideration are,
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim
as prayed for ?
- To What relief?
Point No.1:-
It is the case of the complainant that on 29-12-2007 he purchased Whirlpool refrigerator of 360 liters with double door from opposite party No.1 vide cash bill receipt No.5430001392, for Rs.16,850/-, the warranty of the said product is 5 years (1 +4), but the refrigerator worked only for two years and since then it is causing trouble, very low cooling and the same was informed to opposite party No.1, opposite party No.1 informed the same to opposite party No.4, opposite party sent a person to attend the said repairs, for attending of repairs he issued a cash bill No.418, dt.15-10-2009 for Rs.1850/-. Though there is existing 5 years warranty, the technician of opposite party No.4 issued a bill detailed as compressor replacement, gas charging, service charges, transpoletion of relay ALP, but it functioned for only few days, again the refrigerator giving troubles in functioning. Inspite of making several efforts and demands made with the opposite party No.4, they have not turned up either to replace or to repair the refrigerator. Hence he approached the Forum for redressal.
Inspite of receipt of notice, opposite parties did not turn up either to represent the case or to file counter.
From the documents available on record, we observed that the complainant purchased a new whirlpool refrigerator, which gave troubles within warranty period, the complainant became dissatisfied. And also one of the personnel of the opposite party No.4 attended the repairs of the refrigerator by replacing the compressor, gas charging and issued a bill for Rs.1850/-, dt.15-1-2009 though, it is under the warranty, the technician of the opposite party No.4 issued cash bill, even the refrigerator was repaired, it was functioned only for few days and the same was informed to the opposite parties, but they did not turn up either to replace or to repair the refrigerator. Further it is observed that the manufacturing company is not justified in protracting litigation merely it has money power. And also observed that the complainant purchased a new refrigerator would not be satisfied if it is defective. The loss of satisfaction could be much more in a case when a person buys the machine with his hard earned money.
The same was observed by the Hon’ble National Commission in Suchdeva Industries Vs Deep Aggarwal & Others I (2010) CPJ 120 (NC).
It is further observed that during the warranty period also, the personnel who attended the repairs of refrigerator issued a cash bill for Rs.1850/- for repairs and service charges etc., and it worked only for a few days only and even after few days the refrigerator was not functioned, inspite of several representations, opposite parties did not turn up either to repair or to replace the refrigerator, is nothing but deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.
Point No.2:- In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties No.2 & 3 to supply a new whirlpool refrigerator of 360 liters within one month from the date of receipt of the order or refund the amount of Rs.16,850/-(Rupees Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty only) with interest @9% p.a. from the date of purchase (i.e. from 29-12-2007) till the date of realization. Opposite parties 2 and 3 are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.1850/- (Rupees one thousand, eight hundred and fifty only), collected from the complainant for attending the repairs of refrigerator, during the warranty and also awarded Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) towards damages and costs of the litigation. The claim against opposite party No.1 and 4 is dismissed as not pressed by the complainant.
Dictated to steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, on this 30th day of November, 2011.
President Member
District Consumer Forum,
Khammam
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined for complainant:- None
Witnesses examined for opposite parties:- None
Exhibits marked for Complainant:
Ex.A1:- Original bill issued by opposite party No.1, dated 29-12-2007 for
an amount of Rs.16,850/-.
Ex.A2:- User guide & manual of whirlpool refrigerator
Ex.A3:- Cash bill No.418, dt.15-10-2009 for Rs.1,850-00
Exhibits marked for opposite parties:- Nil -
President Member
District Consumer Forum,
Khammam
