PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                                                                CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 230/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Abhishek Pujari,

S/O-Ananta Kumar Pujari

R/O-Modipara, PO-Modipara, Near Agricultural office,

Sambalpur, Ps-Town,

Dist-Sambalpur-768005, Odisha. 

Mob-8658595730                                               …………………..Complainant

                             Vrs

1. Reliance Digital,

Budharaja Main Road,

Sambalpur, Odisha-768004.

2. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

6^th Floor, DLF Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001,

CIN-U31900DL1995PTC071387.

3. SAI SIDDI AGENCY, Authorized Samsung Service Centre.

Plot No. 572/6650, Amrut Vihar, Infront of Maruti Suzuki Showroom, Ps-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur-768004          …………………..Opp.Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :- Self
2. For the O.P. No. 1              :- Sri S.K. Patjoshi & Associates
3. For the O.P. No.2                           :- Sri. S.S. Mohanty & Associates
4. For the O.P. No.3                           :- Ex-parte

Date of Filing:11.12.2023,Date of Hearing :27.02.2024,Date of Judgement : 08.04.2024

  Presented by Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, MEMBER

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant purchased a new 1.5 ton Air Conditioner of Samsung on dtd. 25.02.2023 from OP NO. 1, dealer and the OP No. 2 is the manufacturer and the OP No. 3 is the authorised service centre. The AC comes with a warranty period of One year which would be expiring on 24.02.2024. From the date of purchase, total six complaints have been filed via phonic customer support of Samsung care unit in relation to a persistent gas leakage issue. Upon raising the requests, the OP No. 3 engineer visited and detected that there is gas leak issue and proceeded to refill the necessary amount of refrigerant gas. The engineer then switched the AC on and the AC functions with all its gas now replenished. Upon finishing these procedures the engineer then said the issue has been resolved and closed. The same problem again arose, the refrigerant gas totally leaks out again within a span of a couple of weeks. The engineer was again assigned and the same process got repeated once again, the refrigerant gas was again refilled and the complaint closed stating that it has been resolved. These cycle of events have repeated for a total of six times within a period of nine months, where an engineer came, refilled and closed the complaint, which is absolutely absurd for  a newly purchased AC. In the course of these repairs, the AC was once totally dismounted by the assigned engineers and was even taken to their nearby quality check hub wherein they said that a copper tube inside the unit is faulty. They then proceeded to somehow weld the tube and said the issue is now resolve. When the same problem again occurred, the engineer who came, totally replaced the copper tube with a new one, according to him and said the issue was now permanently resolved. But after a span of a month, the same issue once again appeared and a fresh complaint was again registered with the Samsung support unit. The Complainant was fed up from the quality of their services and totally frustrated by the usage of the product. Time and again, his patience has been tested under the pretext of false promises and hopes from the customer support unit. For a seventh time now, he has been forced to raise a complaint at the customer care unit. Upon requesting to replace the unit they straight forward denied that it is now not [possible to replace the AC, the company only allows replacement within two weeks from the date of purchase. However, the OPs have failed at their ends to grasp the technical problems with the AC.
2. The Written Version of the OP No. 1 is that the present case is not a consumer dispute as per the provision of CP Act. There was also never any deficiency in rendering service or adoption of any unfair trade practice by the OP No. 1 as the OP No. 1 is only the retailer of the Samsung India Ltd and only sale the product of the OP No. 2. Except marketing of the product manufactured by Samsung India Ltd, this OP No. 1 is no way related to technical service provided to the product manufacture by Samsung India Ltd. One separate section i.e Samsung Care managed and deals regarding technical service of the product.

The Version of the OP NO. 2 is that the OP No. 2 admitted the complaint about dismantling the AC and sending same to the well equipped service center for proper testing. During such observation no defect in the AC was detected and thrice AC was reported to be OK. However, after reinstallation of the AC, another complaint was lodged alleging less cooling for which the entire copper tube (compressor discharge pipe) was replaced and after such replacement, the AC was observed to be performing normally. The grill temperature and back pressure of the AC were observed to be as per recommendations. All the complaints are duly attended to the satisfaction of the Complaint. The AC was repaired by putting minor efforts and replacing minor parts, which are not even related to the sealed system of the AC. This is not a case of denial of rendering services in terms of warranty. The manufacturer always assures to render the best of its services within its limitations. Under such circumstances, this is not an established case of the existence of any manufacturing defect in the AC, deficiency in services, or adoption of any unfair trade practices by the manufacturer and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. From the contentious of the parties it is found that the AC purchased by the Complainant was a defective product i.e. inherent manufacturing defect from immediately after purchase and several visit of engineers of the Ops also, they could not solve the problem. As the engineers/technicians could not solve the problem of the AC after several attempts or the AC was not replaced, as manufacturer deficiency in service found on the part of the OP NO. 2. Deficiency in service of O.P. No.2 is established from the service report of O.P. no.2.

                                                ORDER

The case is disposed of on merit. The O.P No. 2 is directed to replace the AC with a new AC of the same model along with fresh warranty and to pay Rs. 15,000/- towards negligence, deficiency in service as Compensation and Rs. 10,000/- towards cost & litigation expenses of the petition to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which, the O.P. No.2 shall liable to refund the purchase value with 9% interest per annum till realization to the complainant.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 8^th day of April, 2024.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.