Order dictated by:

Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member

          Sh.Dharminder Talwar has brought the instant complaint under section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, on the allegations that he purchased one Eureka Forbes Water Purifier from Opposite Party and entered into service contract for two years from16.12.2014 till 15.12.2016 by paying Rs.2700/-, hence the Opposite Party under said  service contract was under the obligation to do periodical services ad change/ replace the consumables as detailed in the service contract for the safe and clean supply of the water. Opposite Party never visited the complainant for the service of the said water purifier as in detailed time and changed the consumables and the said water purifier remained useless and of no use to the complainant. The complainant made several reminders to the Opposite Party and last complaint dated 3.12.2016 having No.2000805232 but to no effect. Thereafter, inspite of several personal visits and calls by the complainant, the Opposite Party failed to bring any fruitful result till the filing of the present complaint. The Opposite Party failed to comply with the service contract and the said water purifier remains of no use to the complainant in the absence of regular services and change of consumables. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Party in not servicing and changing the consumables of water purifier inspite of service contract is an act of deficiency in services, Unfair Trade Practice   and has caused lot of mental agony, harassment, inconvenience besides financial loss to the complainant for which the Opposite Party is liable to pay the compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Party be directed to do the service and change the consumables of the water purifier and further extent the period of service contract by two years free of cost and comply with the same effectively.

b)      Opposite Party  may also be directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental sufferings, harassment and humiliation suffered by the complainant.

c)       Opposite Parties  may also be directed to pay the adequate costs of the litigation.    

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, Opposite Party appeared through its representative and filed written reply contesting the claim of the complainant and denied that the Opposite Party had taken an annual maintenance contract and has provided all the promised, timely, contractual free services on 20.4.2015, 25.5.2015, 24.9.2015, 20.12.2015 and 12.9.2016 and also replaced the consumables as per contract and stands discharged under the contract. All he filters and carbon under the contract were changed in the machine on 20.12.2015 and also on the date of taking the  contract on 16.12.2014. the allegations made by the complainant are motivated and false to his knowledge and are also falsified by the documentary evidence being placed on record. On the other hand, the complainant has not placed any evidence to substantiate and prove any of his allegations and the same are liable to be rejected. The Opposite Party provided all the free contractual services and still is as has always been ready to provide, free contractual services even through the Annual Maintenance contract of the complainant has expired on 15.12.2016. Opposite Party is ready and willing to get a sample of water from the machine of the complainant tested in a government laboratory to prove the claim of the Opposite Party as per procedure prescribed under the Act. It is submitted all the filers and carbon etc. wee changed on  16.12.2014 and 20.12.2015. It is denied that thee is any loss of inconvenience suffered by the complainant. It is also denied that thee is any deficiency in service as al the promises have been fulfilled by the Opposite Party. Nevertheless, s a gesture of goodwill, the Opposite Party is still and has always been ready and willing to render free services, one last time, even though the AMC of the complainant has expired in 2016. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.

3.       In his bid  to prove the case, complainant tendered  his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 in support of the allegations made in the complaint and also produced copy of invoice cum receipt Ex.C2 and  closed the evidence.

4.       On the other hand, to rebut the evidence on behalf of the complainant, Opposite Party tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Gurpreet Singh Service Group Leader Ex.OP1 and  closed the evidence on behalf of Opposite Party.

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant as well as representative appeared on behalf of Opposite Party and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

6.       In his submissions, the complainant has reiterated the averments made in his complaint and contended that he purchased one Eureka Forbes Water Purifier from Opposite Party, copy of which accounts for Ex.C2  and entered into service contract for two years from 16.12.2014 till 15.12.2016 by paying Rs.2700/-, hence the Opposite Party under said  service contract was under the obligation to do periodical services ad change/ replace the consumables as detailed in the service contract for the safe and clean supply of the water. Opposite Party never visited the complainant for the service of the said water purifier as in detailed time and changed the consumables and the said water purifier remained useless and of no use to the complainant. The complainant made several reminders to the Opposite Party and last complaint dated 3.12.2016 having No.2000805232 but to no effect. Thereafter, inspite of several personal visits and calls by the complainant, the Opposite Party failed to bring any fruitful result till the filing of the present complaint. The Opposite Party failed to comply with the service contract and the said water purifier remains of no use to the complainant in the absence of regular services and change of consumables. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Party in not servicing and changing the consumables of water purifier inspite of service contract is an act of deficiency in services, Unfair Trade Practice. On the other hand, the representative appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party has repelled the aforesaid contentions of the complainant on the ground that the Opposite Party has  provided all the promised, timely, contractual free services on 20.4.2015, 25.5.2015, 24.9.2015, 20.12.2015 and 12.9.2016 and also replaced the consumables as per contract and stands discharged under the contract. All he filters and carbon under the contract were changed in the machine on 20.12.2015 and also on the date of taking the  contract on 16.12.2014. The allegations made by the complainant are motivated and false to his knowledge and are also falsified by the documentary evidence being placed on record. The Opposite Party provided all the free contractual services and still is as has always been ready to provide, free contractual services even through the Annual Maintenance contract of the complainant has expired on 15.12.2016. Though the Opposite Party has argued that Opposite Party has  provided all the promised, timely, contractual free services on 20.4.2015, 25.5.2015, 24.9.2015, 20.12.2015 and 12.9.2016 and also replaced the consumables as per contract and stands discharged under the contract. All the filters and carbon under the contract were changed in the machine on 20.12.2015 and also on the date of taking the  contract on 16.12.2014, but to prove the assertion made in the reply, the Opposite Party has not placed any document to prove that they ever visited the house of the complainant to repair and replace the consumable of the water purifier in dispute. Moreover, what was the need for the complainant to file the present complaint, if the said purifier was in order? Hence, the contention of the Opposite Party that they provided all the contractual free services on 20.4.2015, 25.5.2015, 24.9.2015, 20.12.2015 and 12.9.2016 and also replaced the consumables as per contract and stands discharged under the contract, is not tenable.

7.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we direct the Opposite Party to do the service and change the consumables of the water purifier and further extent the period of service contract by two years free of cost and comply with the same effectively, within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Opposite Party is also directed to pay Rs.3000/- to the complainant on account of compensation for causing mental tension and harassment besides Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses.  Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 27.02.2017.