Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/22/71

Gurdeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Jaswinder Singh

20 Mar 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:71 dated 18.02.2022.                                                 Date of decision: 20.03.2023.

 

Gurdeep Singh Bhangu son of S. Jagir Singh, Proprietor, M/s. Famous Stitch Art, Brown Road, Ludhiana-141008 and resident of House No.6683/A, Ward No.8, Street No.1, New Preet Nagar, Tibba Road, Ludhiana-141007 (Mobile : 98149-55690)                

……Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd., through its Managing Director/Directors/authorized signatory, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-3, New Delhi.
2. Raja Electrical point, Baba Than Singh Road, Mohalla Fateh Ganj, Near CMC Chowk, Ludhiana-141008 (Punjab), through its Proprietor/Partner.
3. M/s. Gopal Dass Hari Chand, Authorized Distributor Daikin, B-37/2830/2A, Indra Nagar, Adjoining Hotel Fortune, Klassic, Ludhiana-141003.                                                                                                                                                                    …….Opposite parties

Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

QUORUM:

SH. SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

MS. MONIKA BHAGAT, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate.

For OPs                         :         Exparte.

 

ORDER

PER SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

1.                In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainant purchased AC Daikin FTL 50 TV 16U3 1.5 Tons vide invoice No.1988 dated 14.02.2021 for Rs.32,500/- from opposite party No.2  who is authorized distributor/retailer of opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.2 gave assurance that the Air conditioner is having excellent performance being top brands of Air conditioners available in  the market and there is very efficient service network of the company and in the event of any problem in working of the air conditioners, the same shall be attended to promptly. Opposite party further assured that in case of any defect in the air conditioner  it will be replaced without any hassle  and informed that opposite party No.3 is the local distributor of Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd. The complainant submitted that soon after installation of the air conditioner on 14.02.2021, right from the beginning, it was not working. The attending technician/mechanic Bikramjit Singh made remark on the invoice issued at the time of installation that “AC is not working.” The complainant made complaints to Daikin Customer Care including complaint dated 31.03.2021 with regard to leakage, then again another complaint dated 16.07.2021 with regard to malfunctioning of Air conditioner followed by other complaints on 17.07.2021 and 02.08.2021. The problem of leakage had continued unabated till date despite communicating complaints with opposite parties and by way of messages sent on official app “Onedios” but to no effect. However, the assurance was given at the time of sale of air conditioner regarding hassle free replacement of air conditioner but the opposite parties have not come true to the commitment/assurances. Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice dated 03.12.2021 upon the opposite parties through his counsel Sh. Jaswinder Singh via registered post but no reply was given by the opposite parties. Hence this complaint, whereby the complainant has prayed for issuing direction to the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, refund of amount of the air conditioner of Rs.32,500/- and also to pay the cost of the complaint Rs.25,000/-.

2.                Notice was sent to the opposite parties through registered post on 07.03.2022 but none turned up on behalf of the opposite parties despite service of notice and as such, the opposite parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.06.2022.   

3.                In support of his exparte claim, the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex. CA in which he reiterated the allegations and the claim of compensation as stated in the complaint. The complainant also tendered documents Ex. C1 is the copy of invoice No.1988 dated 14.02.2021, Ex. C2 to Ex. C5 are the copies of service completion certificates dated 31.03.2021, 16.07.2021, 17.07.2021 and 02.08.2021 respectively, Ex. C6 to Ex. C15 are the copies of screen shot and text messages, Ex. C16 and Ex. C24 are certificates under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 of the complainant, Ex. C17 is the legal notice dated 03.12.2021, Ex. C18 to Ex. C20 are the copies of postal receipts, Ex. C21 to Ex. C23 are the copies of track consignment record and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the arguments of the counsel for the complainant and also gone through the complaint, affidavit and annexed documents produced on record by the complainant.

5.                The complainant purchased air conditioner on 14.02.2021 and found erratic functioning of the air conditioner. The complainant made first complaint on 14.02.2021 and which was duly attended by the representative of the opposite parties. Again on 31.03.2021, 16.07.2021, 17.07.2021 and 02.08.2021 the complainant made complaints with regard to the malfunctioning of the air conditioner due to leakage of pipe. All the complaints were duly attended and the repair job was carried out in presence of the complainant to his satisfaction and job cards were prepared and the complainant accorded his satisfaction on the job cards Ex. C2 to Ex. C5. It is not the case of the complainant that while effective repair, he had to shell out the repair charges rather the repairs were done without any charges and it was done within warranty period. It can be borne out from the record that the last complaint was taken care by the opposite parties on 02.08.2021. The present complaint was filed on 18.02.2022. During that period and during the pendency of this complaint, no subsequent malfunctioning of the air conditioner was ever reported by the complainant to the opposite parties. The grievance of the complainant was promptly and efficiently redressed by the opposite parties as and when it was reported and as such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

6.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

7.                Due to huge pendency of cases, the complaint could not be decided within statutory period.

 

(Monika Bhagat)          (Jaswinder Singh)                      (Sanjeev Batra)                          Member                            Member                                       President         

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:20.03.2023.

Gobind Ram.

 

 

Gurdeep Singh Bhangu Vs Daikin Air-conditioning                CC/22/71

Present:       Sh. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate for complainant.

                   OPs exparte.

 

                   Arguments of the complainant heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

(Monika Bhagat)          (Jaswinder Singh)                      (Sanjeev Batra)                       Member                     Member                                       President         

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:20.03.2023.

Gobind Ram.