Date of Filing:18.09.2008 Date of Order:30.01.2009 BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20 Dated: 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2009 PRESENT Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President. Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member. COMPLAINT NO: 2047 OF 2008 T. Ramaiah S/o. Late Tekhappa R/at Setty Banagega Street Ramanagar Town Ramanagaram Dist. Complainant V/S 1. Big Bazaar Panthalone Retail India Ltd. Satellite Bus Station K.S.R.T.C., Byatarayanapura Mysore Road Bangalore 560 026 2. Whirlpool of India Ltd. No. B1/A12, Ist Floor Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate New Delhi 110 0444 Opposite Parties ORDER By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The facts of the case are that the complainant purchased washing machine on 26.01.2008 for Rs. 8,000/- with two years warranty. The machine worked only for 18 days and thereafter it did not work due to mechanical defect. Complainant intimated the fact to the opposite parties. On 14.02.2008 workman of the opposite party carried out repairs and again after 3 days the machine stopped to work. The complainant intimated this fact to opposite parties. Again the workman carried out some repairs. But the machine was not repaired properly. Complainant paid Rs. 400/- to the workman for two times. Complainant requested the first opposite party to replace the machine or to refund the amount. First opposite party taken the machine to their custody and issued gate pass on 24.06.2008. Legal notice was issued on 04.07.2008 calling upon the opposite parties to refund the amount. The opposite parties have not replied to the notice. Hence, the complaint seeking refund of the amount with interest. 2. Notice issued to opposite parties. Opposite parties put in appearance through advocates and defence version filed. 3. Affidavit evidence also filed. 4. Arguments are heard. 5. The points for consideration are: 1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount of washing machine? 6. The complainant has produced documents. Complainant has produced washing machine warranty card. He has also produced gate pass of opposite party No. 1 dated 24.06.2008. The complainant has also produced copy of legal notice served to the opposite parties. Legal notice was served on opposite party No. 1 on 07.07.2008 to that effect postal acknowledgement has also produced. Even though the notice has been served the opposite party No. 1 has not replied to the notice. By the documents and affidavit of complainant it is very clear that the washing machine purchased by the complainant is having manufacturing defect and the said machine was not working properly soon after purchase. Therefore, this fact was intimated to the opposite parties. Even though the workman of the opposite parties tried to repair the machine, but the machine did not work satisfactorily and defect remained as it is. Opposite party No. 1 is Big Bazaar, a dealer and opposite party No. 2 is a manufacturer of washing machine. Both are responsible to supply defect free product to the consumers. It is duty and obligation of the opposite parties to supply defect free machines to the customers. A customer who has spent Rs. 8,000/- for purchasing washing machine faced problem soon after its purchase. Even though the workman attended the complaint for two times and still the problem was not solved. Therefore, the complainant handed over the machine to the opposite party No. 1 on 24.06.2008. Now the machine is with opposite party No. 1. This fact has been admitted clearly in the defence version. The complainant is fed up with the defective machine and is not satisfied with the product. He wants refund of the amount with interest. The request of the complainant is just, fair, proper and reasonable. Complainant is justified in seeking refund of the amount. Opposite party No. 2 being a very reputed company has to see that no defective product are supplied to the customers. If the customer brings to the notice of company the defect in the machine it becomes duty of the company to supply defect free machine or refund of the amount. Consumer Protection Act is milestone in the history of socio economic legislation and is directed towards achieving public benefit. The Act attempts to remove the helplessness of the consumer which he faces against powerful business house. Consumer Protection Act being a social and benevolent legislation the Act intends to protect the better interests of the Consumers. No consumer will approach the Fora unnecessarily. He will not spend his time, money and energy without having faced enormous problem, difficulty and inconvenience. The complainant who had purchased the brand new washing machine by spending Rs. 8,000/- put to trouble, mental agony and tension on account of defective machine. Therefore, he wants refund of amount with interest. The prayer of the complainant is quite justified and the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to refund the amount. In the result I proceed to pass the following: ORDER 7. The Complaint is allowed. The opposite parties No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs. 8,000/- to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled for 12% interest p.a. from 26.01.2008 on the above amount till payment / realisation. 8. The Complainant is also entitled for Rs. 1,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite parties. 9. The opposite parties No. 1 & 2 are directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order. 10. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2009. Order accordingly, PRESIDENT We concur the above findings. MEMBER
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
