BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

08^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015

O R D E R

SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER

This is a complaint filed by the complainant in person under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, praying to pass an order against OP to repair the washing machine or to refund the amount of Rs.5,500/- on the allegations of deficiency in service.

2.      The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows:

Complainant was using Videocon washing machine model No.FA 55 since around 6 years.  There was a problem in the washing machine on 10.09.2014.  For rectification of his washing machine, he called to just dial on 14.09.2014 for the assistance to provide the phone number of Videocon services.  He received the SMS of few local service agencies.  On 15.09.2014 he received a call from OP stating they are from Videocon services.  The technician by name Mr.Sayeed attended the service and replaced some of the parts of the washing machine.  Complainant paid Rs.5,500/-, OP has given a bill No.1834 for having received Rs.5,500/- from the complainant.  He stated that there is a 6 months warranty.  Washing machine worked only one day and from the next day it stopped working.  Complainant informed the OP with regard to the same.  Next day OP attended and removed the sensor of the washing machine and told that they will replace the same.  From 16.09.2014 complainant is calling OP for the rectification of his washing machine, sometimes they will receive the call stating the technician will come and attend and sometimes nobody will receive his call.  Hence complainant personally visited their shop and requested OP to come and repair his washing machine.  Inspite of paying huge amount of Rs.5,500/- complainant was forced to wash the cloths manually and suffering physically and mentally.  OP neither gave the service nor refunded the amount.  Hence, complainant felt deficiency in service against OP.  Under the circumstances, he has come up with present complaint.  

3.  After registration of complaint, notice is sent to Opposite Party.  In spite of service of notice, OP failed to appear before this Forum.  Hence, OP is placed ex-parte and posted the case for filing affidavit of complainant.

4.  So as to prove the case, the complainant Mr.Srinivas Murthy N, who being the complainant has filed his affidavit evidence in support of complaint averments stating that he had a Videocon washing machine model No.FA 55 since around 6 years.  There was a breakdown of his washing machine on 10.09.2014.  For rectification of his washing machine, he called to just dial on 14.09.2014 for the assistance to provide the phone number of Videocon services.  However he received SMS of few local service agencies.  On 15.09.2014 he received a call from OP stating that they are from Videocon services.  The technician by name Mr.Sayeed attended the service on 15.09.2014 and informed that some of the parts are required to replace.  Complainant paid Rs.5,500/-, for which he has provided the bill stating 6 months warranty.  Washing machine worked only on the day of service and from the next day it was not working.  He informed the same to the technician.  Since from 16.09.2014 complainant is calling OP for the rectification of his washing machine, sometimes they receive his call and replied stating their technician will come and attend and sometimes nobody will receive his call.  In the mean time he personally visited the office of OP and requested OP to come and repair his washing machine.  Inspite of paying huge amount of Rs.5,500/- they are washing their cloths manually and suffering both physically and mentally.  Inspite of repeated requests OP neither repaired the washing machine nor refunded the amount of the complainant.  Hence, he prayed to allow the complaint against OP and grant reliefs as prayed in the complaint.

5. The above said assertions of the complainant have remained unchallenged.  OP has neither filed version nor denied the sworn testimony of the complainant.  So under the circumstances, we have no reasons to disbelieve the sworn testimony of the complainant.

6. Let us have a cursory glance at the documents produced by the complainant.  Document No.1 is the copy of invoice bill dated 15.09.2014 issued by OP to the complainant.  In the said invoice it is mentioned that Videocon gear box replace, P/c board reset, pressure switch replace for a total sum of Rs.5,500/- and has given 6 months warranty.  Document No.2 is letter of complainant to OP dated nil requesting OP to repair his washing machine Videocon model No.FA 55 stating one of the technicians of OP had attended the service on 15.09.2014 and informed some of the parts to be replaced.  Accordingly complainant paid Rs.5,500/- for which the technician had given bill stating with 6 months warranty.  Washing machine worked on the day of service and from next day it stopped working.  Complainant informed the same to OP on the same day.  Since 15.09.2014 complainant is calling for rectification of his washing machine sometimes his call will be attended stating that technician will come and sometimes nobody will receive his call.  Complainant personally visited the shop of OP requesting OP to come and repair his washing machine.  The said letter was sent as a last notice for the repair of his washing machine within 15 days failing which he will take legal action against OP.  The said letter has been received by OP as per document No.3 on 26.11.2014 as per the served postal acknowledgement card.

7. On perusal of oral and documentary evidence of the complainant, it is made clear that the complainant was having Videocon washing machine since 6 years.  The said washing machine became defective on 10.09.2014 and for the purpose of rectification of his washing machine he took the assistance of OP who is a service provider of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning equipments centre, A/c plants, washing machines and electronics works sale.  On 10.09.2014 for the purpose of rectification of his washing machine, he took the assistance of just dial to provide the phone number of Videocon services.  On 15.09.2014 he received a call from OP stating that they are from Videocon services.  The technician by name Mr.Sayeed attended the service of washing machine of the complainant on 15.09.2014 and informed that some of the parts are required to replace.  Hence complainant paid Rs.5,500/-, for which he has provided service as per document No.1 by replacing some parts giving 6 months warranty.  But washing machine worked for only one day and from the next day it stopped working.  Complainant informed the same to the OP.  From 16.09.2014 complainant was calling OP for the rectification of his washing machine, though OP replied that technician will come and attend the same but till today there was no response.  Hence on 29.05.2014 complainant wrote a letter calling upon OP to rectify his washing machine within 15 days failing which he will take legal action against OP.  The said letter has been received by OP on 26.11.2014 as per document no.3.  Inspite of service of the letter/notice of the complainant, OP failed to respond.  Having received Rs.5,500/- from the complainant, OP has neither provided the proper service nor refunded the amount to the complainant.  This act of OP in not providing the proper service or refund of the amount of Rs.5,500/- to the complainant inspite of notice of the complainant, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  We are satisfied that the complainant has proved the deficiency in service against OP.  Under the circumstances, we are of the considered view that OP is liable to refund Rs.5,500/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which OP shall refund the said amount along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of notice i.e., 25.11.2014 to till the date of realization along with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant and accordingly the complaint of complainant is partly sustainable.  In the result for the foregoing reasons we proceed to pass the following:

                                         O R D E R

The complaint of complainant is allowed in part.  OP is directed to refund Rs.5,500/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which OP shall refund the said amount to the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of notice i.e., 25.11.2014 till the date of realization.  Further OP is directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.2,500/- to the complainant.

          Send the copy of the order to both the parties free of costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 08^th day of September 2015)

MEMBER                             MEMBER                       PRESIDENT

Vln* 

COMPLAINT NO.2216/2014

Complainant                 -        Sri.Srinivas Murthy N.

Bangalore - 560 070.

                                          -vs-

Opposite Party              -        COOL GLOBAL REFRIGERATION,

Bangalore - 560 011.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant dated 22.05.2015.

1. Sri.Srinivas Murthy N.

          OP  -       Nil

MEMBER                            MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

Vln*