1. The brief facts of the case of the complainant are that she purchased a Videocon Washing Machine model WMVA 60A11Dhu Serial No.760715270152212709 for Rs.8300/- from OP.1 vide Invoice No.1924 dt.29.11.15 but after 12 days of purchase the said machine did not function proper in a normal condition. It is submitted that she reported the fact to OP.1 on 10.12.15 who promised to rectify the defects after consulting the service provider but in vain. Repeated requests of the complainant to OP.1 also did not yield any result. Thus alleging defect in goods and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, she filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops 1 & 2 to replace the waching machine and to pay Rs.75, 000/- towards compensation to the complainant.
2. The OP.1 filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that the complainant is not the purchaser of the machine but someone had gifted her during the marriage of the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant has never visited the shop of OP.1 for intimating the defects in the washing machine and has filed a false case. It is further submitted that the rectification of defect is the job of Ops 2 & 3 and th OP.1 being the seller is nothing to do with that matter. Thus denying any fault on its part, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.
3. In spite of valid notice, the Ops 2 & 3 neither filed counter nor participated in this proceeding in any manner. The complainant has filed certain documents along with affidavit in support of her case. Heard from the complainant as well as OP.1 through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.
4. In this case purchase of washing machine in the name of the complainant from OP.1 on 29.11.2015 is an admitted fact. The complainant stated that after 12 days of purchase the machine did not function properly for which she intimated the fact to OP.1. According to the complinant, the OP.1 assured to pass the grievance of the complainant to the service centre of the Company but since last 11 months from the date of defect the complainant has been intimating but the OP.1 did not respond.
5. The OP.1 stated that the complainant has never intimated him regarding the defect in the washing machine. It is seen that the complainant is a lady and staying in the rural area. At best she can lodge complaint before the OP.1 from which the machine has been purchased. Further bare denial of the OP will not do in the face of affidavit filed by the complainant in support of her case. From the above facts, it can not be believedthat the complainant has not informed the OP.1 regarding defect with her washing machine.
6. It is further seen that the Ops 2 & 3 in spite of getting notices from the Forum have neither participated in this proceeding nor enquired into the matter. If the Ops knew regarding defect in the machine manufactured by them, it was their duty to enquire into the matter but they did not do so. It is also not forth coming whether the OP.1 has consulted with the Ops 2 & 3 regarding the present dispute and for its proper redressal. In the above promises, we find defect in the goods sold to the complainant and deficiency in service committed by the Ops as it came to their knowledge after filing of this case. As such the Ops are required to get the washing machine repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to grant any compensation in favour of the complainant.
7. Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP.1 is directed to ventilate the grievance of the complainant to Ops 2 & 3 and get the washing machine of the complainant repaired to her satisfaction within 30 days from the date of communication of this order failing which execution of this order shall be entertained with costs as deems fit and proper.
(to dict.)
