Delhi

South Delhi

CC/214/2015

ANIL KUND GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ADGE MEDICAL SYSTEMS - Opp.Party(s)

04 Jun 2019

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM -II UDYOG SADAN C C 22 23
QUTUB INSTITUTIONNAL AREA BEHIND QUTUB HOTEL NEW DELHI 110016
 
Complaint Case No. CC/214/2015
( Date of Filing : 13 Aug 2015 )
 
1. ANIL KUND GUPTA
HOUSE NO. 15 SRESHTHA VIHAR DELHI 110092
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. ADGE MEDICAL SYSTEMS
R-84 BASEMENT KHIRKI EXTENSION NEW DELHI 110017
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SH A S YADAV PRESIDENT
  KIRAN KAUSHAL MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
NONE
 
For the Opp. Party:
NONE
 
Dated : 04 Jun 2019
Final Order / Judgement

                                                        DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

 Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

 

Case No.214/2015

 

Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta

S/o Late Sh. Hira Lal Gupta

R/o House No.15,

Sreshtha Vihar,

Delhi-110092                                                               ….Complainant

Versus

M/s Adage Medical System,

Through its Proprietor/Principal Office,

Mr. Sandip Das

AT R-84, Basement,

Khirki Extension,

New Delhi-110017                                                ….Opposite Party

   

                                                Date of Institution        :13.08.15      Date of Order      :04.06.19

 

Coram:

Sh. A.S. Yadav, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

 

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

 

  1. Brief facts as stated by the complainant are:

The complainant, Anil Kumar Gupta purchased the medical equipments namely ‘RESMED-S9 ESCAPE AUTO’ and one ‘MIRAGE MICRO MASK’ on for a total amount of Rs.55,000/- from M/s Adage Medical System hereinafter referred to as OP. The complainant got the equipment serviced on 23.09.14 as the air pressure in the equipment was missing, the mask did not fit properly and the air was also passing through the mask. It is further averred that in February, 2015 executive of OP visited the residence of the complainant and after checking the aforesaid product told the complainant that S-9 filter of the product was not working properly and suggested to replace the same. Thereafter, 6 pieces of S-9 filter were replaced on 20.02.15 which cost Rs.2100/- to the complainant. The complainant made the payment under protest as the said product was still in warranty period. Despite replacing the filters the air pressure was still missing and the air was still passing through the mask. The complainant made several complaints regarding the same to OP. The complainant was assured by the owner that either he will get the problem fixed or replace the product.

  1.  
  1. OP resisted the complaint inter-alia submitting that the complainant had paid Rs.2100/- to OP on the purchase of 6 pieces of S-9 filters which is a consumable. OP further states that it is clearly mentioned in the terms and conditions of the warranty card that “this warranty does not extend to other accessories and consumables supplied as standard accessories”.
    1.  OP further clarifies that as per the complainant after replacing the filter also the air pressure in the equipment was still missing and the air was passing through the mask but in reality, technically there is no connection of filter to air passing through the mask. Air will pass through the mask, only if the user will put the mask correctly on the nose. Filter is used only for filtration of the air. Showing its bonafide OP states that even when the matter was under adjudication in the Forum OP supplied three number of clips to the complainant so that the user could use the machine comfortably vide invoice No.806 dated 07.11.15. It shows that the machine was still working fine as the complainant had purchased the spare parts of the accessories to use the machine. Hence, OP prays for dismissal of the complaint with the exemplary cost.
  2. Complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP reiterating the averments made in the complaint. 
  3. Complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit.  On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kr. Dass, Proprietor has been filed on behalf of OP.
  4. Written arguments have been filed on behalf    of the parties. 
  5. We have heard the oral arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsels of the OP. None appeared on behalf of the complainant to advance oral arguments despite affording the opportunity. 
  6. We have gone through the material placed on record. Before we go into the merits of the case it is important to produce the terms and conditions of the warranty card:

 

  1.  

 

2 year warranty: CPAP, Bi-Level, battery accessories, ventilation & portable diagnostics/screening devices.

 

1 year warranty: Clip-type finger pulse sensors, CPAP and bi-level device data modules, Oximeters & CPAP and bi-level device oximeter adapters, Humidifiers and humidifier cleanable water tub & Titration control devices.

 

6 months warranty: Batteries for use in ResMed internal and external battery systems.

 

3 months warranty: Mask system (including mask frame, cushion, headgear and tubing)- excluding single-use devices,

         

Accessories- excluding single- use devices, Flex –type finger pulse sensors, Humidfier water tubs.

 

This warranty does not extend to other accessories and consumables supplied as standard accessories.”

 

Evidently, certain parts of the equipment were covered within two years warranty, others were under one year warranty and some were covered in six months and three months warranty period.

  1. Admittedly the complainant purchased the medical equipment from OP which worked fine even after the first service was provided for the product on 23.09.14. It is only in  November, 2014 that the said product started causing problems and was not functioning properly.  Thereafter on the suggestion of OP six pieces of S-9  filters were replaced on 20.02.15 at the cost of Rs.2,100/-. As per Ex. CW1/14 the complainant paid Rs.9,800/- for Mirage Micro, Filter *3 and S-9 Escape Auto Service but despite getting the parts replaced and making payment for the same, the problem existing in the medical equipment could not be resolved.  This clearly shows that the parts replaced by OP were not either required to be replaced or were replaced unnecessarily as the said product did not function properly even after changing these parts.
  2. Therefore this Forum is of the opinion that though the complainant was ready to pay for spare parts and wanted the medical equipment to be functioning fine desperately; OP could not resolve his complaint. Hence, we are of the opinion that product in question being the medical equipment, the complainant be awarded the cost of parts which were replaced and for mental agony and inconvenience. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and direct OP to pay Rs.50,000/- in lumpsum to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receiving of copy of this order. Failing which OP shall be liable to pay 6% interest per annum till realization.

 

 

Announced on 04.06.19.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SH A S YADAV]
PRESIDENT
 
[ KIRAN KAUSHAL]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.