C.C. No.154/2023

Davinder Sanga,

JSW Utkal Steel Ltd.,

Madhuban, Paradeep,

Dist.- Jagatsinghpur.                                                 ……………. Complainant

                           (Versus)

1. CES & MD,

Haier Appliances (India Pvt. Ltd.,

Building-1, Okhla Industrial Estate,

Phase-III, New Delhi- 110020.

2. Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd.,

H-9, Block B-1,

Tughlaqabad Extension,

Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate,

Tughlakabad, New Delhi- 110044.

3. Tulsi Refrigeration,

Tinimuhani,

Kendrapara- 754221.…..… Opposite parties

ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:

                                                                                           JUDGMENT

            Complainant has filed the consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;

            “Direct the opposite parties to refund the cost of refrigerator Rs.52,190/- along with 18% interest and pay compensation Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation”.

            The brief fact of the case is that, the complainant ordered a refrigerator Haier HRF618SS on Amazon India site on 25.6.2018 for Rs.52,190/- and the same was shipped on 06.7.2018 by their marketing partner M/s Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. at Gajraula, Uttar Pradesh of complainant’s location and delivered on 10.7.2018. Since day one onward refrigerator was having cooling issue and the same was being communicated to their customer care from time to time. Every time customer care was found giving excuses of new technology, external high temperature and tries to close the complaints without much anticipation. The refrigerator stopped cooling at all in Feb.,2023 and the same was being communicated to customer care. But till date there is no action from the opposite parties. Now at the time of filing of consumer complaint complainant was residing within the jurisdiction of this Commission for which the consumer complaint has been filed.

The warranty of compressor of the refrigerator is for 10 years but the same has been found defective and in spite of repairing by opposite party No.3 the same could not be rectified. The cost of refrigerator was Rs.52,190/- and during warranty period complainant has paid Rs.3,440/- towards cost of repairing to opposite party No.3 to whom complainant was referred by opposite party No.1 & 2 but the defect could not be rectified and the refrigerator is occupying the space.

            We therefore held that opposite parties No.1 & 2 are liable for supplying a defective product which went out of order during warranty period and the same has not been rectified by opposite parties so the opposite parties are therefore liable to pay compensation.

            Now question arises as to how much the complainant is entitled for a refrigerator of 5 years old and after use. We held that the ends of justice will meet if we direct to opposite parties No.1 & 2 to purchase another refrigerator of same model/make or higher model in 50% cost. The opposite parties shall also refund Rs.2,000/- towards repairing cost of old price out of Rs.3,440/- and also pay Rs.3,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation thus total Rs.7,000/- is to be paid by opposite parties No.1 & 2 which can be paid or adjusted at the time of purchase of refrigerator. The old refrigerator shall also be kept by complainant. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of. Send copies of the order to both parties by post immediately for compliance.       

            Pronounced in the open Commission on this 11^th Sept.,2024.