SRI. ROY PAUL : PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for an order directing the opposite parties either to repair vacuum cleaner under warranty or to replace new one along with of Rs.50,000/-as compensation and cost.
The case of the complainant in brief:-
The complainant had purchased a vacuum cleaner of Eureka Forbes Euroclean through online on 5/4/2017 with one year warranty . Due to non functioning of the machine the complainant contacted the opposite parties in the first week of January 2018. But the opposite parties personnel could not rectifying the defect and later on 21/3/18 2nd opposite party took away the machine for repair. But so far they did not turned up to repair/replace the product. . There is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the complaint.
Summons to opposite parties 2&3 are duly served but not turned up to appear before the Fora. 1st opposite party closed their shop and left the place . So the Fora set the opposite parties as exparte.
The complainant submitted his chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination to the to the tune of the pleadings in the complaint . Exts A1 to A4 series documents also were marked. According to him during the warranty period itself the vacuum cleaner became defective and the service personnel (opposite party No.3) took away the product for repair. But so far the opposite parties did not turned up either to repair the machine or to replace with a new one. Hence we the Fora hold that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties . We the fora perused Exts A1 to A4 documents also. As per Ext.A1 bill the price of the product is Rs.1805/- only. Ext.A2 dt.21/3/18 shows that the machine was taken for service by 3rd opposite party. One year warranty is offered in Ext.A3 operation manual. Ext.A4 medical prescription shows that the complainant is suffering from dust allergy . So we hold that due to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered much hardships ,mental agony, loss of time and money. From the forgoing discussions and findings we the fora hold that the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to repair the machine or to replace with a new one. Apart from that the opposite parties are also liable to pay sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as litigation cost to the complainant
In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to repair the machine or replace with new one within 30 days of receipt of the order. The opposite parties are further direct to pay sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within the aforesaid 30 days. Failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 1986.
Sd/ Sd/
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Ext.A1- purchase bill
A2- 21/3/18 service report
A3-Operation manual
A4 series- medical prescriptions
Sd/ Sd/
MEMBER PRESIDENT
eva
/Forwarded by Order/
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
