DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PATIALA.
Consumer Complaint No.405 Dt.08/10/2018 Decided on: 03/09/2020
Gagandeep Singh son of Bhupindersingh now R/o 92-B, Dashmesh Nagar, Near Gurudwara Sahib, Near Phulkian Enclave, Patiala.
…...Complainant
Versus
- Amar Trader through its Prop. Dharampura Bazar, Patiala.
- Prasad N K Systech Pvt. Ltd. c/o Aggarwal & company, Opp. HDFC ATM, Near Old Chemist Market, Bagichi Het Ram, Sheran Wala Gate, Patiala through its Manager Patiala.
- Godrej & Boyce, Manufacturer Company Ltd. Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli, Mumbai through its Managing Director.
….Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President Sh. Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh. Sukhjinder Singh Adv. counsel for complainant. OPs No.1& 3 ex-parte.
Sh. Dhiraj Puri Adv. counsel for OP No.2.
ORDER
JASJIT SINGH BHINDER, PRESIDENT
1. Gagandeep Singh complainant has filed this complaint under Section 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties namely Amar Trader and Ors. (hereinafter referred to as the OPs).
2. Brief facts of the case is that on 30/03/2016 complainant purchased one Godrej refrigerator having model No.RFGDRFFR TEON-331P 4-3 MEADO from OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.33000/- vide bill No.R3200 dt.30/03/2016. At the time of purchase OP No.1 assured the complainant about the best product made by the company and one year warranty was also given to the complainant. It is alleged by the complainant that refrigerator working fine for few months then it started giving problem with the door and the cooling was reduced and complainant sent the same to OP No.2 several times.
It is alleged that on 27/3/2017 when the fridge was returned to the complainant, it was told by the OP to the complainant that now the door of the fridge has been replaced and OP No.2 gave the proposal to extend its warranty for another 4 years by paying Rs.3972/-. Complainant gave Rs.3972 for 4 year warranty extension who gave the receipt no.2017 dt.29/03/2017 in the complainant mother name. After that refrigerator become more noisy and its automatic cut working has stopped working which has resulted in overheating of the fridge. It is alleged that its inside tray was also broken.
It is further alleged that complainant started calling OP No.1 but OP No.1 refused to give any help and told to call the Customer Care directly. After that complainant used all modes to complaint against the product like calling, Email etc. OP No.2 started ignoring the call and in reply messages were that they can not trace the address. That on 06/06/2017 on call, OP No.2 straight way refused to help the complainant. Complainant also issued a legal notice dt.28/11/217 through his counsel to replace the refrigerator or refund the cost of Rs.33000/-. After that Op No.2 visited the house of the complainant many times and on inspection they finally said that the refrigerator is irreparable and assured the complainant that they will replace his defective refrigerator. Since then the complainant had been running from pillar to post to get his refrigerator repaired or replaced but in the last week of September 2018 Ops No.1 & 2 refused the complainant for any help.
With this background of facts, the complainant has filed the present complaint with the prayer to pay the compensation to the tune ofRs.20,000/- on account of deficiency in services and unfair trade practice, to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation, Rs.10,000/- on account of mental harassment, agony and tension, to pay Rs.10,000/- on account of punitive damages and to refund Rs.33000/- for selling defective refrigerator to the complainant along with interest @ 18 % P.A.
3. Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of OPs No.1 despite service through office peon, thus OP No.1 was proceeded against ex-parte on 13/12/2018. None has appeared on behalf of OP No.3 despite service through registered post, thus OP No.3 was proceeded against ex-parte on 09/01/2019. OP No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written version. OP No.2 has taken preliminary objections that present complaint is gross misuse of process of law. Complainant has got no cause of action to file the present complaint and the same has been filed only to harass and to cause injury to the reputation of the OPs. On merits OP No.2 has denied all the averments as alleged in the complainant. It is admitted by the Op that company provide 1+4 years warranty and never provides guarantee. It is admitted that on 27/03/2017 a call received through service centre to look into the refrigerator and then experienced technician Satgur Singh attended the call service and found no inherent defect. It is admitted that complainant was advised to extend the warranty for four years by paying Rs.3972/- and complainant paid the amount and proper receipt was issued. That there is no defect in the refrigerator and is not making any noise. That no message, call was ever received by the answering OP for service or for any complaint. After denying all other allegations made in the complaint, prayer has been made to dismiss the complaint with cost.
4. In support of the complaint, Ld. counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence Ex.CW1/A affidavit of the complainant along with documents Ex.C-1 Original Bill, Ex.C-2 Original receipt of extended warranty, Ex.C-3 copy of confirmation SMS, Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-12 copy of Interactions, Ex.C-13 copy of SMS regarding house not found, Ex.C-14 copy of Legal notice, Ex.C-15 original postal receipt and closed the evidence.
5. Ld. Counsel for OP No.2 has also tendered Ex.OPA affidavit of Varinder Yadav, Prop. Of Prasad N K/ OP No.2 along with documents Ex.OP-1 authority letter dt.23/1/2019 and closed the evidence of OP No.2.
6. We have heard the ld. Counsel for the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP No.2 and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
7. Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that refrigerator make Godrej was purchased by the complainant vide bill No.R3200 dt.30/03/2016 for a sum of Rs.33000/-. It is further argued that there was a warranty for one year and warranty was got extended for 4 years by depositing Rs.3972/-. It is further argued that fridge started giving problems after few months of its purchase and the same was not rectified. As the warranty period still exists so OPs are entitled to replace or refund the amount of the fridge.
8. Ld. Counsel for the complainant has tendered Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant and proved Ex.C-1 bill for the purchase of fridge for a sum of Rs.33000/- on 30/03/2016. It is stated that when there was defect in the fridge, the fridge was sent to OP No.1 for repair. It is further stated that warranty was extended for 4 years by depositing Rs.3972/-. It is argued that still the defect in the fridge exists so fridge be replaced.
9. Ex.C-1 is the receipt vide which fridge was purchased for a sum of Rs.33000/- on 30/03/2016. Ex.C-2 is the receipt for amount of Rs.3972/- for 4 years extended warranty which was deposited by the complainant. Ex.C-3 is the SMS receipt of Rs.3972/-. Ex.C-4 is the email sent by the OP company to the complainant. Ex.C-5 is the Email sent by the complainant to the OP regarding stopping of fridge. Ex.OP-1 & 3 were proceeded against ex-parte. OP No.2 has filed written statement and it is admitted that warranty was extended for 4 years. Ld. Counsel for OP No.2 has tendered affidavit Ex.OPA in which he depose as per their written statement. It is admitted that warranty was extended. So from the documents on the file, it is clear that fridge was purchased vide receipt Ex.C-1 for Rs.33000/- on 30/03/2016 and warranty was extended for 4 years by depositing Rs.3972/-. There are emails sent by the complainant, it is mentioned that there is defect in the main door and automatic cut and that refrigerator was also giving the noise. So it is clear from the documents that there was defect in the refrigerator.
10. OP No.1 did not appear despite service. OP No.1 is proceeded ex-parte on 13/12/2018 and OP No.3 was proceeded ex-parte on 19/01/2019. Admittedly the refrigerator was purchased from OP No.1 for a sum of Rs.33,000/- on 30/03/216 and within few months from its purchase the refrigerator gave problem continuously. As such the complaint stands allowed and OP No.1 is directed to change the refrigerator of the complainant as the warranty of the same was got extended for four years. OP No.1 is also directed to pay Rs.5000/- as costs of the complaint to the complainant. Complainant is directed to return the refrigerator in question to OP No.1. Compliance of the order be made by the OP within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
ANNOUNCED*
Dated: 03/09/2020
Vinod Kumar Gulati Jasjit Singh Bhinder Member President
