Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/56/2022

Raghbir Singh S/o Tara Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Electronics Point - Opp.Party(s)

Dharmender Narban

29 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

                                                                    Complaint No.:    56 of 2022.

                                                                   Date of institution: 03.02.2022.

                                                                   Date of decision: 29.08.2022

 

Raghbir Singh s/o Shri Tara Chand, aged 64 years, r/o village Sirsala, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

                                                                                                …Complainant.

                                                     Versus

 

1. Electronic Point, Sharadhanand Chowk, Red Road, Kurukshetra, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, through its Proprietor.
2. Haier Appliance India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.H-6, DMIC Integrated Industrial Township, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, through its Managing Director/Regional Director.
3. Bhagwati Refrigeration, Shop No.3 & 4, Jangra Dharamsala, near Chota Railway Station & Goyal Gas Agency, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, through its Proprietor.

...Respondents.

 

CORAM:   NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.    

                   NEELAM, MEMBER.

                  

Present:       Shri Dharmender Narban, Advocate for the complainant.

                   All the Opposite Parties ex-parte vide order dated 05.04.2022.

 

ORDER:

 

1.                This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (for short “Act”).

2.                It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant purchased a Haier Washing Machine of 5 kg. Model No.HTW80-186V (Purple) from OP No.1 vide bill No.388 dated 12.01.2018 for a sum of Rs.11100/-. Just after 3/4 months of its purchase, said machine started showing problem including stopping in between the washing and washer not working properly, so in this regard, he approached OP No.3 and its engineer visited his house and repaired the said machine, but after some days, machine again started to show the said problems. On his request, again engineer of OP No.3 visited his house and replaced some parts with new one. On the request of said engineer, complainant purchased Annul Maintenance Contract (AMC) No.HILAMC0000105854 for Rs.2100/- on 18.3.2020 from OP No.3. In that AMC, date of purchase is mentioned 19.03.2020 with start date 26.03.2020 valid upto 26.03.2023. In the month of November 2021, said machine was not washing the clothes properly and drawer of the same also stop working and in this regard, he approached the OPs on 26.12.2021, but this time OP No.3 flatly refused to repair or replace the same. The above act and conduct of OPs amounts to deficiency in service, due to which, he suffered great mental agony, hardship and financial loss, constraining him to file the present complaint against the OPs.

3.                Upon receipt of complaint, its notices were ordered to be sent to the OPs through registered post, which were delivered upon them as is clear from the Track Consignment Reports, but they failed to appear before this Commission on 05.04.2022 and were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte on that date by this Commission.

4.                In support to support his case, complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel of the complainant and carefully gone through the case file.

6.                Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant purchased a Haier Washing Machine of 5 kg. from OP No.1 vide bill No.388 dated 12.01.2018 for a sum of Rs.11100/-. He further argued that just after 3/4 months of its purchase, said machine started showing problem including stopping in between the washing and washer not working properly, so in this regard, the complainant approached OP No.3 and its engineer visited his house and repaired the said machine, but after some days, machine again started to show the said problems. On his request, again engineer of OP No.3 visited his house and replaced some parts with new one. On the request of said engineer, complainant purchased Annul Maintenance Contract (AMC) No.HILAMC0000105854 for Rs.2100/- on 18.3.2020 from OP No.3. In that AMC, date of purchase is mentioned 19.03.2020 with start date 26.03.2020 valid upto 26.03.2023. In the month of November 2021, said machine was not washing the clothes properly and drawer of the same also stop working and in this regard, the complainant approached the OPs on 26.12.2021, but this time OP NO.3 flatly refused to repair or replace the same. The above act and conduct of OPs amounts to deficiency in service.

7.                There is no dispute that the complainant purchased a Haier Washing Machine of 5 kg. from OP No.1, vide bill No.388 dated 12.01.2018 for a sum of Rs.11100/- Ex.C-1.

8.                The grievance of the complainant is that just after 3/4 months of purchase of said washing machine, it started showing problem including stopping in between the washing, and washer not working properly. In this regard, he approached OP No.3 and its engineer visited his house and repaired the said machine by replacing some parts, but after some days, same problem occurred again. On the asking of OPs, on 18.03.2020, he purchased Annul Maintenance Contract (AMC) No.HILAMC0000105854 for Rs.2100/- from OP No.3 vide Tax Invoice Ex.C-. Complainant further alleged that in that AMC, date of purchase is mentioned 19.03.2020 instead of 12.01.2018, with start date 26.03.2020 valid upto 26.03.2023. The complainant made repeated requests to the OPs to repair the said machine, but on 26.12.2021, they flatly refused to repair the same. To support his above contentions, complainant produced his affidavit as Ex.CW1/A along with documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3, on the case file, whereas, on the other hand, none of the OPs have appeared before this Commission, to rebut the above-said contentions of the complainant and opted to be proceeded against ex-parte. So, evidence adduced by the complainant goes unrebutted and unchallenged, against the OPs, and thus, we have no option, but to accept the version of the complainant, which is duly supported by his affidavit and other supporting documents.  

9.                Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, we found that washing machine in question of complainant became defective and in this regard, the complainant visited the OPs time and again to resolve this issue, but the OPs failed to resolve the same even after taking the Annual Maintenance Contract by the complainant from the OPs w.e.f. 26.03.2020 till 26.03.2023, which is an act of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. In the complaint in hand, complainant prayed for replace or refund the amount of the washing machine, but this prayer of complainant is not plausible, because the complainant himself admitted in his complaint that the washing machine became defective after 3/4 months from its purchase, meaning thereby, the washing machine in question was not having any manufacturing/patent defect in it, so, no such direction can be given in the matter in question. Hence, the OPs are liable to repair the washing machine in question of the complainant to his full satisfaction. The OPs are also liable to be burdened with compensation amount with litigation expenses for their act of deficiency in service.  

10.              In view of our above discussion, we partly accept the present complaint against the OPs and direct the OPs to repair the washing machine in question of the complainant to the full satisfaction of the complainant. The OPs are further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant, as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment, caused to the complainant, due to an act of deficiency in service, on the part of the OPs along with Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. The OPs are further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of 30 days, from the date of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 71/72 of the Act, against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Commission:

Dated:29.08.2022.

    

                                                                                       (Neelam Kashyap)               

          (Neelam)                                                             President,

          Member.                                                               DCDRC, Kurukshetra.           
 

 

 

 

 

 

Typed by: Sham Kalra, Stenographer.