SRI P.K.PANDA, HON’BLE PRESIDENT … The history of complaint in brief is that, the complainant had purchased a GODREJ AC on dated 20.01.2022 from O.P.No.1 by paying the considerable amount of Rs. 73900/- . After twenty days of purchase the said A.C. arise low cooling Problem . So, the complainant approached to OP-1 & 2. Who repeatedly assured that they will resolve the problem soon, but after three month OP-2 told to complainant that the cost of the A.C. will refund to you, submit your Bank account details and adhar and pan card, on 02.07.2022 all the details submitted by the complainant and thereafter the Ops send so many massages to the complainant but they he did not refund the cost of the A.C. Thereafter the complainant on 20.08.2022 issued a legal notice through Advocate Sri K.Ch.Jain of Dhamtari, Chatishghar to OP-1 and 2. After receiving the legal notice also no action has been taken by the Ops till date. That due to the such type of harassment, negligent acts of the Ops the complainant has suffered. Hence, under compulsions the complainant craves leave of this Commission seeking justice. For such illegal action of the OP.s, the Complainant inflicted great humility, financial hardship and mental tension. So he prays the Commission to direct the OP.s to refund the cost of the alleged set and a sum of Rs.200,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the litigation in the best interest of justice.
2. The complainant has filed copy of some relevant documents like invoice and advocate notice copy to support his case and case has been heard minutely. The OP.s neither appeared nor filed their counter in the case despite a number of calls, hence they set ex parte and the Commission decided to proceed with the case basing on documents as available in record on merit. Submissions after perusal considered.
3. It reveals from record that the complainant has procured the said A.C.on dt. 20.01.2022 and the same found low cooling after 20 days of its purchase i.e. within full valid warranty period. It is seen from the record that, the complainant time and again approached the OP.s intimating the so called defects, but the OP.s neither rectified the product properly in warranty period nor replaced the same or paid its cost. The complainant first approached the OP.1 and taking his advice he approached the OP.2 and 3 with a hope of repair properly . It is further reveals that the complainant assured to refund the amounts and their advice he submitted all requisites to the Ops, but all his effort became futile. In our concerned opinion, the complainant being an educated has purchased the product by paying a huge remuneration alluring great features by use of it but he restrained to facilitate the same, otherwise in the present case the OP.s unless refund the same tried to patch up the latches having behind the product. On the other hand the OP.s neither replaced the A.C. nor refund of its price on claim of complainant. Perusing the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the product in question purchased by the complainant has inherent manufacturing defect. The service rendered by OP.s being duty bound is not satisfactory and the OP.3 being the principal is liable for the deficiency accrued on the part of its agents. As such the complainant suffered mental agony with the defective product and also inflicted financial losses for the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, he liable for compensation.
4. From all corners of the case, it is observed that, the OP.s are not challenged to the allegation made by complainant on manufacturing defect, hence we found that the OP.s without following the warranty norms acts as illegal and highhanded manner, which seems gross abuse of process of law, per se, we found arbitrary and unfair practices on the part of OP.s which amounts to deficiency in service. As thus the complainant is harassed as alleged. Hence, he lawfully entitled for compensatory relief. However, as the OP.3 is the manufacturer of the said product, the complaint is allowed against him in part with cost.
ORDER
- The opposite party No.3 supra is hereby directed to pay the invoice price of the GODREJ A.C. i.e. Rs.73,900/-, inter alia to pay Rs.5,000/-(Five thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.2000/-(Two thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.
- All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization.
( Pronounced on this the 19th day of Jan' 2024).
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Memo No.___15___/ Dated___19/01/2024.
Copy to the party concerned.
President
Dist.CDR Commission,Nabarangpur
