DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM. BOLANGIR.
………………….
Presents:-
- Sri P.Samantara, President.
- Sri G.K.Rath, Member.
Dated,Bolangir the 30th day of March 2016.
C.C.No.56 of 2014.
Subhrajit Ganguly son of Bhargav Ganguly c/o. Dhirendra Nath Sahoo,
(Ex.N A.C.Doctor) At- Girl’s High School para,Titilagarh,
P.O/P.S-Titilagarh. Dist- Bolangir.
.. .. Complainant.
-Versus-
1.M/S. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd, 2nd,3rd & 4th Floor, Tower-C.
Vipul Tech SquareSector-43,Golf Course Road, Gurgaon-122009.
2.M/s. Mahesh Enterprises,Authorised dealer of Samsung AC,
Samaleswari Chowk,Bolangir (Odisa.)
3.M/S. Sony Enteprises, Titilagarh, At/P.O/P.S- Titilagarh,
Dist- Bolangir, Odisha.
4.Samsung India Ltd. Bhubaneswar .
.. .. Opp.Parties.
Adv for the complainant- Sri R.Rath and Associates.
Adv.for the O.Ps 1 & 4 - Sri R.Sahoo & Associates.
Adv. For the O.Ps 2 & 3 – None.
Date of filing of the case – 19.08.2014
Date of order - 30.03.2016
JUDGMENT.
Sri P.Samantara, President.
1. Succinctly put, the complainant purchased Samsung Brand Split AC (1.5 ton,5 star AC) bearing model No.AR18FC5U AEBBN against a consideration of Rs 36,500/- vide receipt bearing No.4065 dt.07.10.2013. The product carries two years warranty.
2. The complainant averred post purchase in the month of March the AC stopped cooling. The defect has been intimated to dealer and service centre on dt.21.03.2014 vide the registration No.- 8457535908. Off late, the service engineer attend on dt.02.04.2014 and informed that due to leakage of gas, the AC is not getting cooled. Subsequently the gas refilled on dt.04.04.2014 but it is complained the defect persists. On dated 09.04.2014 again refilled the gas but to no effect and the service engineer or the service centre till the day neither attending to repair, rectification or refund the money for such a chronic defect ailed product.
3. The complainant further averred being a resident of Titilagarh, the product purchased to ward off heavy summer season uneasiness but the purpose failed because of the callousness, non deligent, non business like and topsy turvy attitude of the O.Ps dealing with the problem. Prayed the A.C purchased from the O.Ps is of no value hence the O.Ps be directed to refund the money with interest and sufferance of harassment and mental agony and appropriate relief’s. Relied with money receipt, warranty card and affidavit.
4. Pursuant to notice, the O.Ps appeared on dt.16.04.2015 in too late lastly appeared on 19.08.2015 and not prefer to file any version on the subject in notice on several opportunities given with.
5. Heard the complainant and perused the materials on record.
6. Prima-facie we come to notice, the O.Ps are dragging with ill motive as because they firstly appeared in too late and later willfully not filing any version, though one year has already been passed beyond the statutory limitations.
7. Perusal of record reveals the case is maintainable and did not suffer barred of limitation or jurisdiction. In purchase of split AC against the paid consideration is a bonafide consumer under the C.P.Act,1986. The split AC purchased on dt.07.10.2014 against invoice No-4065 from “Sony’s ENTERPRISES’, Shastri chowk, Titilagarh, The money receipt speaks the shop is the authorized dealer so competent enough to represent the brand in either manner.
8. The model No- AR 18FC5UAEBBN, Samsung split AC carries a comprehensive 12 months warranty and additional 24 months warranty on condenser.
9. On the first instance, the material on record reveals the service of notice is sufficient under sub section-4 of 28A under Consumer Protection Act 1986,
10. Further as more than one year has been passed since institution and it is quite apparent the O.Ps are in collusion and dragging the case indefinitely irrespective of giving so many opportunities and the petitioner incurring heavy losses and harassment for of no fault at his end. So on such back drop we prefer to decide, the case under section 13(2) of the Act in interest of justice.
11. The defect first surfaced is non cooling one and the service engineer detected and confirmed same as leakage of gas, subsequent defects surfaced of same nature and repair made by technician did not sustained despite rectified by several times. In such a circumstance we come to believe any protracted complaint of same nature within a comprehensive warranty period is deemed as inherent in the product and also defect relates to manufacturing one, which is not removed either in complete parts removal nor exchanged or replaced with a new one, as the product is comprehensively warranted one, so a half hazard repairment and non effective repairment along with non rendering of service within the warranty is also a case of deficiency in service on a defect product and the dealer is liable for selling a sub standard air-conditioner even after repeated rectification which is amply proved and substantive in nature that the defects is inherent from manufacturing point, our same view is fortified with decisions in the given below.
- It is the duty of manufacturer/dealer to repair defects in a product during warranty period within a reasonable time- Krishna Kumar Sahu vrs- Manager Jai Shri Electronics and others-2010(1) CPR 149(CG).
(2) Dealer is bound to repair the vehicle during period of warranty- Sooraj Automobiles
Ltd. Vrs-Shri Bhawanlal-2013(3) CPR.12 NC.
(3) Full refund price of vehicle is permissible in case of persistent manufacturing defects-
BM,Marikar Motors vrs- Baburaj and Others-2012(1)CPR 382 Karela.
12. In view of the above noted findings and settled principle we allow the case on merit and the O.Ps purposefully dragging the case, only made the appearance and taking repeated opportunities to file any version shows, the attendance in rectification of the defect in the air-conditioner create an apprehension that the O.Ps have no defence to advance on any plea. Thus it is ordered. The harassment and mental agony is really un unspeakable one.
ORDER.
The O.Ps are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs 36,500/- (Thirty six thousand & five hundred)only along with a sum of Rs 5,000/-(Five thousand) only, as compensatory amount for the loss & harassment sustained within 30 days of this order or alternatively replace the defective AC with a new split AC of same specification brand and defect free one and with extended warranty to the petitioner within above time frame ,failing which a penalty of Rs 20/- per day will accrue till realization/compliance and also return the old one in exchange.
(II) Besides, the O.Ps are liable to pay a sum of Rs 2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand) only each to the petitioner for non submission of written version despite giving sufficient & several opportunities, callousness to the call of the forum and willfully deferring to attend in hearing & making the issue less gravitious ,although knows the product relates to air-conditioning. The each penalties of Rs 2,000/- be paid within the above noted time frame, failing which interest @ 12% per annum will accrue from the date of the order till realization inclusive of litigation cost incurred.
ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2016.
(G.K.Rath) (P.Samantara)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
