Delhi

North East

CC/415/2012

Mohd. Israr - Complainant(s)

Versus

Blue Star Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

04 Mar 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

Complaint Case No. 415/12

 

CORAM:        Hon’ble President Sh. N.A. Zaidi

                        Hon’ble Member Sh. N.A. Alvi

                       

In the matter of:

Mohd. Israr

S/o Sh. MD. Kallan,

R/o Z-1/169-70,

Usmania Jama Masjid,

Timber Market,

Welcome Colony, Seelampur,

Delhi-110053.                                                                                                 Complainant                                       

           

Versus

 

1. Blue Star Ltd.

Dlf Corporal Park,

Dlf, Phase-3,

Gurgaon, Haryana.

 

2. United Aircon,(Sales & Services)

30/166, Anuvrat Tower,

Commercial Complex,

Wazirpur Indl. Area, Delhi-52

 

3. Blue Star Ltd.

Cbo-Acrsd,

II Pokharan Road,

Majiwada, Thane-400601.                                    Opposite Parties

 

                                                                                      DATE OF INSTITUTION: 17-10-2012

                                                                                      DATE OF DECISION      : 17-04-2015

 

N.A. Zaidi, President:-

Nishat Ahmad Alvi, Member:-

Order

 

As per the complaint the complainant on 12-8-2011 purchased five Air Conditioners of OP1 make, 4 of 2 ton Two Star Rated, Model Code 2H, appliances No. 11A04214,11A02971,11A07334 and 11A03964  and 1 of 1.5 ton Splite vide Model No. 2HW18RA serial No.11A13264  from OP2, its dealer, for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,36,300/-.  In addition to the price OP2 also charged Rs. 18,850/- towards installation, stabilizer, stand and delivery. The said Air Conditioners carried 1+4 year warranty. One year for the repair/replacement of any part of the equipment and 4 years for the compressor. It is alleged that right from the date of the installation the Air Conditioners were not giving proper cooling and creating a loud sound. On 23-9-2011 complaint to this effect was lodged to the OPs. Wherefrom the visiting engineer told that it is due to gas leakage or the gas was not properly filled. But even after filling the gas complained remained the same. OP also changed the fan of motors and P.C.B. of the said Air Conditioners, but problem could not be resolved. Complainant lodged another complaint on 26-10-2011 and also contacted the Head Office of OP2, whose officials assured the rectification of the defect. On 5-11-2011 service engineer of OP2 carried necessary inspections of the Air Conditioners, made dry service and charged the gas but the defect of less cooling remained the same. On next season in 2012 complainant again lodged a complaint of less cooling on 16-4-2012. Service personnel of the OP attended but could not remove the defects of no cooling, water dropping, loud sound and visiting service associate Shri Satinder Ragav, stated that there is an inherent defect in the Air Conditioners and assured the complainant to consult his senior officers to get replacement of all the sets for which he promised to call the complainant within 7 days. But he never called. On 17-5-2012 again complainant approached service centre of OPs on phone No. 18002091177 but nobody bothered there.  Again complaints bearing Numbers. B-1205171090, B-1205171091, B-1205171092, B-1205171093, B-1205171094, all dated 17-5-2012 and B-1205250939, B-12052550942, B-12052550948, B-1205250949, B-1205255095 all dated 25-5-2012 were lodged but the OPs kept avoiding the complainant on one pretext or the other and did not give any satisfactory reply. Later on OPs started behaving rudely and refusing to entertain the complainant. Finally, a written complaint dated 29-6-2012 was sent to OP1 and OP2 through registered post. That too, inspite of service, was not acted upon by the OPs. The Air Conditioners were not working and have become dead and Ops have not done anything inspite of complainant’s so many visits and are neither rectifying the defects nor giving any satisfactory reply. Complainant has alleged that OPs knowing well that the Air Conditioners were not of satisfactory quality of condition and were old one sold the defective Air Conditioners deliberately with the intention of duping him. The complainant has prayed for directions to the OPs to either replace the Air Conditioners with new or to refund Rs. 1,36,300/- the cost of Air Conditioners with Rs. 18,850/- paid for installation etc. Complainant has also prayed for compensation of Rs. 80,000/- beside Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.

            After notice OP1 and OP3 alleging expire of warranty of 12 months stated that no cause of action thereafter arises against it for the defects in the Air Conditioner except if it is in the compressor. Complainant has malafide made this complaint after using the Air Conditioner for more than a year to get new ones. All the complaints of complainant were duly attended by it as well as by OP2.  As per warranty clause the warranty is valid only if Air Conditioners operate on 230 volts electricity + 10% in accordance with the company. Further stating that warranty does not cover air filter, plastic parts and grills and louvers or the serial No is defaced or altered/changed. The guarantee in no case shall extend for refund or replacement of the Air Conditioners. There is no loss or damage caused to the complainant and no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Hence, complaint does not come within the purview of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Installation charges were paid to OP2 only and it has no knowledge and concern at all with it. Allegation of AC not giving proper cooling and creating loud sound and complainant not being satisfied with the Air Conditioners is specifically denied. It also denied any failure of its service personnel in removing the defects of lesser cooling and loud sound, further denying that any defect remained after they attended and filled the gas. Complaints were immediately attended whenever made. Even any information of complaint from OP2 was immediately responded to by it. Complaint dated 23-9-2011 in one of the Air Conditioner was attended by OP1 and OP3 and work was completed to the satisfaction of the complainant on 4-10-2011. There was defect in fan motor and P.C.B and the P.C.B were replaced by OP1 and OP3 strictly in terms of the warranty without charging any additional payment. The cost of the 5 Air Conditioners were Rs. 1,21,157/- and the rest of the amount charged in the invoice was for the VAT which has gone to the government and not in the account of the OPs. Regarding engineer of OP2’s visit on 5-11-2011, OP1 and OP3 states that it pertains to OP2 only. Allegation that its service associate namely Satindir Ragav stated that AC’s have inherent defect and he will consult his senior officers for replacement and to contact the complainant within 7 days. On repeated complaints OPs never refused to entertain him nor behaved rudely.  No written complaint allegedly on 29-6-2012 was received by OP but a call from OP2, in response whereof its service engineer checked the Air Conditioners on 6-7-2012 and found the same Ok, further denying that the Air Conditioners were not working and became dead and that there is any deficiency on the part of OP1 and OP2. On 6-7-2012 in one of the units gas was refilled and the set was working and giving temperature of 17’c after 5 minutes. Other units were working and giving temperature of 17.5’c after 3 minutes and another unit of 18’c after 5 minutes. It is also stated that in one of the service reports dated 6-7-2012 service engineer noticed that the drain pipe was damaged by rats and after making the same in order the said unit was also giving temperature of 16.8’c after 4 minutes. These facts have been concealed by the complainant. OPs have not sold the defective goods as alleged with the intention of duping the complainant, knowing the defect and OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

            OP2 by filing its reply confirming the sale of 5 Air Conditioners states that its responsibility is limited to only 3 free services within 1 year and it is manufacturer only who is responsible for the warranty. All Air Conditioners were perfectly right, giving proper cooling, no loud sound, tested ok and working normally. Complaints were attended in time fan motor and P.C.B of the said Air Conditioners were changed. Regarding complaint dated 26-10-2011 and attending the complaint by service associate on 5-11-2011 and engineer Sh. Satinder Ragav on 16-4-2012 and complaint dated 17-5-2012, OP2 simply states that it does not pertain it but not specifically denied or explained the actual fact thereof. Every time the complainant approached service centre only and the same was not in their knowledge however, OP2 has annexed service vouchers. Question of its refusal never arises and that every complaint was duly checked and attended without any delay. Air Conditioners of unsatisfactory quality or condition and old being sold to complainant is false, further stating that all pieces are checked by company engineers and again every part of Air Conditioners is checked at its level also and only then it is installed in the premises that too the satisfaction of the customer and prayed for declaring the complaint null and void.

            Both the parties filed their affidavits by way of evidence and the relevant documents.

            Heard and perused the complaint.

            Admittedly, first complaint is dated 23-9-2011 within warranty period. Complaint was attended by OPs, gas was refilled, fan and P.C.B were changed. Thereafter, so many complaints and OPs admittedly given service. Representatives/ Engineer of the manufacturer also attended the complaint. Repeated complaints are not denied by OPs but the statement that they have duly attended the complaints. On the one hand they are saying that every complaint was attended and defects rectified. On the other hand they say that Air Conditioners were not having defects like lesser cooling and loud sound. While they refilled the gas and changed fan and P.C.B. Thus OPs make self contradictory statements. Not only this OP2 on the one hand and OP1 and OP3 on the other hand are shifting burden of responsibility on one another. All this show that the Air Conditioners though not defective on installation but just after one month started creating problems and OPs inspite of their best efforts could not remove the defects permanently, as after few days of every service again problem is complained of. OPs state that they entertained complaints and were not rude show that there were repeated complaints. There is no defence raised by OPs but defect being only of warranty which is not true as first complaint was after a month within 12 months of warranty period. Service vouchers as placed by OP1 and OP3 shows that there is endorsement of the defects as well as of the objection of the complainant on every voucher that the complaints still exist and the Air Conditioners are not working.

            Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the Air Conditioners started creating problems within warranty period and the defects complained of could not be rectified by the OPs even after repeated complaints and visits of OPs’ engineers/representatives who also changed the fan and P.C.B of the Air Conditioners. As per settle law in case the defect is not curable it is a manufacturing defect and in that case the manufacturer is liable to replace the Air Conditioners.  

            Therefore, holding OP1 and OP3 guilty of providing the complainant the Air Conditioners having manufacturing defects, we direct them either to replace the defective Air Conditioners with new ones alongwith fresh warranty or refund the cost of the Air Conditioners being Rs. 1,21,157/- alongwith compensation of Rs. 20,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant within one month from the receipt of this order. Failing which the amount of Rs. 1,21,157/- shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. thereon from the date of order till final compliance of this order.

Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.

File be consigned to record room.

(Announced on 17-04-2015) 

           

           

             (N.A. Zaidi)                                                                             (Nishat Ahmad Alvi) 

               President                                                                                         Member