Complaint presented on :07.01.2016
Date of disposal : 18.11.2021
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
CHENNAI (NORTH)
@ 2ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.
PRESENT: THIRU. J. JUSTIN DAVID, M.A., M.L. : PRESIDENT
THIRU. S. BALASUBRAMANIAN, M.A., M.L. : MEMBER
C.C. No.35/2016
DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 18th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021
Ranganathan,
Son of K.Narasimhachari,
Door No.23A, Anderson Street,
Ayanavaram, Chennai – 600 023.
.. Complainant. ..Vs..
1.ETA General Pvt Limited,
Rep by its Managing Director/Director,
ETA Home, 3rd Floor,
7/163, Opp Loyola College,
Sterling Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2.Jayam Electronics,
Rep by its Authorized Signatory,
(Dealers & Distributors)
No.363, K.H.Road,
Ayanavam, Chennai – 600 023.
.. Opposite parties.
Counsel for the complainant : M/s.P.C.Harikumar& Associates
Counsel for the 1st opposite party : M/s. K. Jayaraman, and another
Counsel for the 2nd opposite party : M/s. T.V.Krishnakumar and another
ORDER
THIRU. J. JUSTIN DAVID, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to replace the fresh O.G. Air Conditioner or pay the cost of the O.G. Air Conditioner and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards deficiency in service & unfair trade practicewith Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and to pay the costs of the complaint.
1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
The complainant had purchase OG General Air Conditioner (0.75) Model 09AATB from the 2nd opposite party on 24.07.2014, vide invoice No.6477 and the same was installed on 27.07.2014 by the installation staff of the 1st opposite party. The 2nd opposite party is one of the distributors of selling the various products of the 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party is a manufacturer of Air Conditioner and other products in the name and stule eof Ö General”. The air conditioner was working well ill February 2015 and thereafter the actual problem started from 2nd March 2015 onwards. As soon as the problem was started, it was brought to the notice of the 2nd opposite party visited the complainant’s house and completely checked the air conditioner and certified orally that there is a manufacturing defect exists in the compressor, as a result of which the air conditioner was not getting good cooling effect and requested the complainnt to connect the 1st opposite party in order to rectify or replace the new unit. There are innumerable requests and demands to the 1st opposite party to rectify the manufacturing defects. But all the efforts made by the complainant were gone in vain. In response to the complaint lodged to the 1st opposite party, one Technical Staff Mr.Raja (Mobile No.7299932091) of the 1st opposite party came to the complainant’s residence and throughly checked the air conditioner unit and sought three days time to repair the air conditioner since there is a manufacturing defect exists in the control panel in controlling the fan speed. The opposite party has not taken any efforts to rectify the manufacturing defect. The 1st opposite party sold the defected manufacturing air conditioner replace the defected air conditioner unit even though the complaint was lodged very well within the warranty period which is noting but the suppression of fcts and amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The 1st opposite party in order to evade the compensation, falsely alleged that as if the complainant lodging the first complaint only on 11.06.2015 and not within the warranty period. The entire manufacturing defects have been notified as well as certified by the opposite parties within the warranty period and the same cannot be denied by the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
2.WRITTEN VERSION FILED BY THE 1st OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:
The complainant has purchase a Split Air Conditioner 0.75 Ton on 24.06.2014. As company policy, on receipt of call after sale of a product, a technician is deputed to the place of the customer to check the product and verify its condition and install the same. Likewise in this case a call from the complainant side was received for installation, after this case a call from the complainant side was received for installation, after receiving the call may clien’s technican verified and checked the AC conditioner and installed the same and the said AC wa cooling fine to your client’s entire satisfaction. After one year from the date of purchae a call was received from the complainant on 11.06.2015 an the same was registered in the customer case history vide Job No. CHE11506140115 for less cooling. Immediately on receipt of complaint technician attended the same at the complainant home for service an checked the AC Condition. At that time he came to know that the AC working properly. But the problem is the room size, the complainant have purchased 0.75 – Ton AC, the said AC is not suitable in his room. Even explaining the same the complainant want to replace the AC with free of cost. It is stated that even though the opposite party is replace new AC the result is same in the complainant’s room. As per the term and conditions of the Warranty Clause No.3(a) “Subject to the above clause, any part of the Air Conditioner found defective, due to faulty material or workmanship, during the warranty period, shall be repaired or replaced with functionally working equivalent part by the company or Authorised sales and service dealers only”and Clause No.3 (b) that “Part of the unit replaced or reparied under the terms of the warranty are warranted for the remaining period of the original warranty period.”This opposite party has not sold an AC with manufacturing defect. The 1st opposite party is having good name in the market and there is no manufacturing defect in the product. There is any deficiency on the part of this opposite party in rendering its service towards the complainant. The present complaint has been filed alleging completely false and base;ess faces and hence the same is liable to be dismissed.
3.WRITTEN VERSION FILED BY THE 2nd OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:
The complaint is not maintainable against this 2nd opposite party. There is no privity of contract between the complainant and this opposite party. This opposite party is a dealer and distributor of the1st opposite party. This opposite party admits that the complainant, purchased the OG General Air Conditioner (0.75) model 09AATB, from this 2nd party on 24.07.2014, vide invoice No.6477 and the same was fixed by the Technical Staff of the 1st opposite party on 26.07.2014. As per the admission of the complainant the AC was working to the best satisfaction of the complainant. In the month of April 2015, when the complainant informed this oppoiste party that the cooling effect was very slow, this opposite party directed the complainant, to make a complaint to the OG service. This opposite party or his technical staff, did not visit the complainant’s house nor checked the air conditioner as falsely stated in the complaint. This complaint is not maintainable against this 2nd opposite party and the same may be dismissed with costs.
4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
- Whether the opposite parties are liable to replace the O General Air Conditioner?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation towards deficiency
in service and mental agony?
- To what other relief, the complainant is entitled?
5. POINT NO :1& 3
The 1st opposite party is a manufacture of air conditioner in the name and style of O General. The 2nd opposite party is one of the distributors of selling the various products of the 1st opposite party. The complainant had purchased a OGeneral Air Conditioner (0.75) Model 09AATB from the second opposite party on 24.07.2014, vide invoice No.6477 and the same was installed on 27.07.2014 . The above fact is admitted by the opposite parties. Ex.A1 is the copy of invoice issued by the 2nd opposite party in the name of complainant on 24.07.2014.
06. The complainant alleged the said air conditioner was working well till Feb.2015 and thereafter actual problem started from 02.03.2015 onwards. To prove the same the complainant issued e-mails to the customer care of 1st opposite party on various dates Ex.A2 is the e-mail dated 11.03.2015 in which the complainant has stated the cooling effect was very slow. Ex.A3 is the e-mail dated 25.05.2015, Ex.A4 is the e-mail dated 26.05.2015 and Ex.A5 is the e-mail 08.06.2015. The above e-mails would clearly proves that there are some defects in the AC purchase by the complainant and defect occurred within the warrant period that is within one year from the date of purchase.
07. The opposite parties in their written version contended that after one year from the date of purchase a call was received from the complainant on 11.06.2015 and same was registered and immediately on receipt of complaint technician attended the problem. The 1st opposite party further contended there is no defect in the AC during the warranty period and therefore the opposite parties are not liable to replace the AC. The documents filed on the side of the complainant would clearly proves there are some defects in the AC purchased by the complainant from the 2nd opposite party, within the warranty period. The 1st opposite party is liable to rectify the defects in the AC, which occurs during the warranty period on free of cost.
08.The complainant alleged there is manufacturing defects in the product. But, the 1st opposite party disputes the same by saying the 1st opposite party having good name in the market and there is no manufacturing defect in the product. Hence it is duty of the complainant to prove there is manufacturing defect in the product. The complainant nether failed any expert opinion nor filed any report from qualified engineer regarding the alleged manufacture defects in the product. This commission unable to find any proof to show that there is manufacturing defect in the product. Therefore the complainant is not entitled for replacement of AC. On the other hand the 1st opposite party is liable to rectify all the defect in the AC on free of cost.
09. The complainant before filing this complaint before this commission issued legal notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2 and the opposite parties also issued reply to the legal notice, to the complainant’s counsel.The legal notice and reply were marked as exhibits on the side of complainant as well as on the side of1st opposite party.The 1st opposite party inspite of receipt of notice failed to rectify the defect in the product and same caused mental agony to the complainant. It is the duty of the 1st opposite party who is the manufacturer of the AC to rectify all the defect in the product. But the 1st opposite party failed their duty and same amounts to deficiency in service. Because of the deficiency in service the complainant suffered mental agony. Therefore there is deficiency in service on the part of 1st opposite party and the 1st opposite party liable to rectify the defect in the AC on free of cost. Further the complainant is entailed for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation, deficiency in service and mental agony.
10. POINT NO :4
In the result, this complaint is allowed in part. The 1st opposite party is directed to rectify the defect in O-General Air Condition(0.75) Model 09AATB on free of cost within two months from the date of receipt of this order. Further the 1st opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) towards compensation besides a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Five thousand only) towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
The above amount shall be paid within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of this order failing which the said amount of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand only) carrying interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till the date of payment. This complaint against 2nd opposite party is dismissed.
Dictated by the President to the Assistant taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by usin the open Forum on this the 18th day of November 2021.
MEMBER – I PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 24.07.2014 Copy of the invoice
Ex.A2 dated 11.03.2015 Copy of the mail sent to ETA
Ex.A3 dated 25.05.2015 Copy of the mail sent to ETA
Ex.A4 dated 26.05.2015 Coy of the reply sent by ETA
Ex.A5 dated 08.06.2015 Copy of the mail sent to opposite parties
Ex.A6 dated 11.06.2015 Copy of the reply maid sent by opposite party
Ex.A7 dated 11.06.2015 Copy of the legal notice sent to the opposite parties
Ex.A8 dated 13.06.2015 Copy of the Acknowledgement
Ex.A9 dated 16.07.2015 Copy of the first reminder send to the opposite parties
Ex.A10 dated 21.07.2015 Copy of the acknowledgement of opposite parties
Ex.A11 dated 28.08.2015 Reply sent by the opposite parties through their counsel
Ex.A12 dated 26.10.2015 Coy of the Rejoinder sent to the 1st opposite party counsel
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE 1stOPPOSITE PARTY:
Ex.B1 dated 14.06.2015 Job No.CHE11506140115
Ex.B2 dated NIL Warrant Card
Ex.B3 dated 18.08.2015 Reply Notice
Ex.B4 dated 26.10.2015 Rejoinder notice
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE 2nd OPPOSITE PARTY:
….. NIL ….
MEMBER – I PRESIDENT
