DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.228 of 2018

                                                   Date of institution:  20.02.2018

                                                   Date of decision   :  24.04.2019

Ankur Suri, 2709-B, Sector 70, Mohali-160071, Mobile No.9814099341

…….Complainant

Versus

1.     Exide House, 59E Chowringhee Road, Elgin, Sreepally, Bhowanipore, Kolkata, West Bengal-700020.

2.     Sangrur Motors, Booth No.119, Phase-7, Mohali.

……..Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of

the Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:    Shri G.K. Dhir, President,

                Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member

Present:     Complainant in person.

                OP No.1 Ex-parte.

Order by :-  Shri G.K. Dhir, President.

Order

                Complainant purchased one Exide Battery on 03.10.2014 from OP No.2, authorised dealer of manufacturer i.e. OP No.1 by paying Rs.3,100/- in addition to handing over of old battery owned by him. This battery was carrying warranty for 48 months, but it started giving trouble in the second year of purchase. Complainant contacted OP No.2 many times, but to no effect. Even approach to OP No.1 through phone calls or emails did not entail any consequence and that is why this complaint filed after serving legal notice for claiming relief of replacement of battery. Compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- more claimed. Price of old battery of Rs.1,000/- even more claimed.

2.             OP No.1 is ex-parte in this case.

3.             Today complainant suffered statement for not pressing the complaint against OP No.2 because he has gone abroad. So virtually complaint against OP No.2 has been withdrawn. After such withdrawal of complaint against OP No.2, complainant suffered statement for tendering in evidence his affidavit alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and then closed evidence.

4.             Oral arguments of complainant heard and record gone through.

5.             Copy of invoice Ex.C-1 establishes that Exide Battery of worth of Rs.3,100/- purchased by complainant from OP No.2 on 03.10.2014. On this bill Ex.C-1 itself it is endorsed that battery carries warranty of 48 months. So warranty period was to elapse on 02.10.2018. However, this battery started giving trouble and that is why emails for the first time sent on 19.07.2017 and then on 24.07.2017 and 27.07.2017 as revealed by contents of Ex.C-2, but despite lodging of claim through emails for removal of defects, those defects have not been removed and as such certainly complainant stands denuded the benefits of warranty, despite the fact that defects in the battery liable to be cured/removed by 02.10.2018, as referred above.  As response to email correspondence not given by OP and as such complainant had to serve legal notice Ex.C-3 also and thereafter purchase new battery on 25.01.2018 as revealed by cash memo/bill Ex.C-4. For this harassment of complainant, OP No.1 the manufacturer liable to compensate the complainant by refunding the price of Rs.3,100/-.  Complainant contends that price of the old battery of Rs.1,000/- more be ordered to be refunded, but complainant enjoyed the battery services for more than two years and six months after purchase without any fault therein and as such entitlement of complainant for price of old battery is not there. Though complainant contends that defects in the purchased battery from OP No.2 surfaced in 2015, but no document produced to show regarding grievance of the defects projected prior to email dated 19.07.2017. Being so, complainant at the most is able to establish as if defects in the battery occurred six months prior to 19.07.2017 as mentioned in email message of 19.07.2017. As complainant availed battery services for more than two years without defects virtually, and as such price of old battery must not be ordered to be refunded, otherwise complainant will get undue benefit of using the battery, defect free for more than two years.

6.             On the invoice Ex.C-1 itself it has been mentioned that responsibility of dealer i.e. OP No.2 ceases once goods are sold and if that be the position, then liability for removing defects in the product remains of manufacturer. Being so, the complaint against OP No.1 merits acceptance. For ensuring that refund of amount of Rs.3,100/- done within specified period, penal clause regarding payment of interest @ 7% per annum also needs be added so that OP No.1 may not harass unnecessarily the complainant in refund of the ordered amount of Rs.3,100/-.

7.             As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed ex-parte against OP No.1 with direction to it to refund the amount of Rs.3,100/- (Rs. Three Thousand One Hundred only) within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which complainant will be entitled to interest @ 7% per annum from today onwards till payment.  Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand only) and litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand only) more allowed in favour of complainant and against OP No.1.  Payment of these amounts of compensation and litigation expenses be made within 30 days from receipt of certified copy of order.   However, complaint against OP No.2 stands dismissed due to relinquishment of claim by complainant through recorded statement of today itself.  Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.  File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced

April 24, 2019

                                                                (G.K. Dhir)

                                                                President

(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)

Member