DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 333 of 26.8.2016

                                      Decided on:   31.5.2017

Pawan Kumar Sanghi, Advocate, son of Late Sh.Lekh Ram Sanghi, Advocate, resident of # 64, Mansahia Colony, Near 21 No. Railway Crossing, Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Daikin Air-conditioning  India Pvt.Ltd., F-25/2, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-II, New Delhi-110020, through its Chairperson.

2.       Daikin Air-conditioning  India Pvt.Ltd.,SCO 14&15, Sector 9-D, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager/Regional Sales Manager.

3.       M/s Marshall Air Conditioners, SCO 31, Mini Market, Adalat Bazar, Patiala, authorized dealer for Daikin Air-conditioning  India Pvt.Ltd. in Patiala, through its proprietor.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                                      Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member                                                                    

ARGUED BY:

                                      Sh.P.K.Sanghi, Advocate, complainant in person.

                                      Smt.Mandeep Kaur,Advocate,counsel for OPs No.1&2.

                                      Opposite party No.3 Ex-parte.                                     

 ORDER

                                    SMT.NEELAM GUPTA, MEMBER

                 Sh. Pawan Kumar Sanghi, complainant  has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) praying for the following reliefs:-

1. To  replace the entire Air Conditioner unit.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment  to him, alongwith litigation expenses and
3. To grant any other relief, which this Forum may deem fit.

2.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that on 30.6.2016, he purchased Daikin Split  Air-conditioner of 1.5 ton capacity from OP no.3, for an amount of Rs.38000/-The inner unit of said Air Conditioner bears Sr.No.0022264, Model No.ATC50RRV161 and outer unit bears Sr.No.0022477 and Model No.RCA50RRV161. The same was installed on 31.6.2016 by the installation team of the OPs. At the time of installation, it had been noticed that the outer unit of the said A.C. was making a loud air cutting noise, which was immediately brought to the notice of the installation team. They suggested to wait for 10-12 days. It is averred by the complainant that after waiting for more than 20 days, when the noise from the outer unit did not stop, he reported the matter to OP no.3 on 21.7.2016. OP no.3 sent a team of engineers for checking the A.C. and its units. On checking, the engineers of the said team told that there was manufacturing defect in the outer unit , which could not be repaired and could only be replaced. Thereafter, the complainant contacted OP No.1’s customer care No.1800-102-9300 and lodged a complaint vide service request No.QJU160732786 on 21.7.2016.He was informed that Mr.Manpreet Singh, the company engineer of Op no.1 will visit the site for checking the A.C. but nobody contacted the complainant till 22.7.2016 . He sent a complaint at the e-mail address of OPs No.1&2. He received reply to the e-mail on 23.7.2016. He also contacted a number of authorized and concerned persons of OPs no.1&2 at Chandigarh, Patiala and Ludhiana, for the rectification of the problem of the A.C. but neither the complaint has been resolved nor any proper remedy was provided to him. Thereafter on 30.7.2016, Sh.Ashish Verma, Engineer of OPs no.1&2 alongwith some companions visited his house and after checking confirmed that the A.C. was certainly creating loud air cutting noise and assured the complainant that they will replace the entire air conditioner and its accessory between 7^th to 10^th August,2016 but on calling said Mr.Ashish Verma, he flatly refused to do so stating that company is not interested in replacing the said unit. On the same, the complainant contacted one Mr.S.P.Singh, Regional Sales Manager of Chandigarh Branch, on his mobile number, who also promised that the needful will be done at the earliest but till today no appropriate action has been taken by the OPs.There is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs for which he is suffering from mental agony and physical harassment. Hence this complaint.

3.                On being put to notice, OPs no.1&2 appeared and filed the written version while OP no.3 failed to come present despite service and was accordingly proceeded against ex-parte. In the written version filed by OPs no.1&2, preliminary objection has been taken to the effect that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against them. On merits , it is stated that after installation of the A.C., its AC unit was working properly and the complainant was satisfied with its performance. However, he noticed minor sound in the outdoor unit. The technician told the complainant that such sound was on account of echo as the outdoor unit of AC  was placed in narrow area/lobby thereby not giving sufficient space to air to flow properly. It is further averred that soon after getting service call/complaint, a complaint number was assigned to the complainant  and a technician was appointed to attend the complaint. It is denied that the complainant made complaint on 21.7.2016  at OP No.1’s customer care No.1800-102-9300 and got complaint No.QJU160732786. It is stated that the complainant first approached OPs no.1&2 on 22.7.2016 through an e-mail, which was duly acknowledged by customer service team on 23.7.2016 and then complaint number was allotted. It is further stated that the technician of OPs no.1&2 immediately attended the service call/ complaint of the complainant. On checking the A.C. he found no defect in the outdoor unit of the same. Technician offered for the replacement of fan motor and fan blade, just to exhibit the complainant that there is no defect in the unit of the A.C.which was accepted to him. Accordingly on 30.7.2016, the technician replaced Fan motor and fan blade  of the unit with new parts. There is no manufacturing defect in any part of the unit. After denying all other averments made in the complaint, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4.                 On being called to do so, the complainant tendered in evidence his sworn affidavit, Ex.CA, affidavit of Sh.Sonu Yadav, Ex.CB, affidavit of Sh.Anand Puri, Advocate, Ex.CC alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C15 and closed his evidence.

                   The ld. counsel for the OPs No.1&2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Roopesh Jain, Company Secretary, Ex.OPA alongwith documents Exs.OP1 & OP2 and closed the evidence.

5.                 We have heard the complainant, the ld. counsel for OPs No.1&2, gone through the written arguments filed by the complainant & the ld. counsel for OPs No.1&2 and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.

6.                Ex.C1 is the copy of the invoice, whereby the complainant purchased the A.C. from OP no.3 on 30.6.2016. Ex.C2 to Ex.C4 are the copies of SMS messages sent by the OP to the complainant.Ex.C5 is the e-mail sent by the complainant to the OP and Ex.C6 is the reply of the e-mail sent by the OP to the complainant on 30.7.2016.Mr.Ashish Verma, an engineer of the OP visited the house of the complainant and he confirmed regarding the noise and assured to replace the said A.C. between 7^th August to 10^th August,2016. When the complainant contacted Mr.Ashish Verma on 5.8.2016, he flatly refused to replace the A.C..As such the complainant underwent a lot of harassment and mental agony at the hands of the OPs, which amounted to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps.

7.                In view of the aforesaid discussion, we accept the complaint of the complainant with a direction to OPs No.1&2 to replace the A.C. of the complainant with a new one of the same make with requisite warranty and if that is not possible to refund an amount of Rs.38,000/-, the same being the price of the A.C. in question. OPs are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.6000/-as compensation for the harassment undergone by the complainant alongwith a sum of Rs.4000/- as litigation expenses. Order be complied by OPs no.1&2 within a period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules. Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:31.5.2017                

                                                                   NEENA SANDHU

                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                   NEELAM GUPTA

                                                                         MEMBER