BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 549 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 17.09.2019
Date of Decision : 16.11.2023.
Sachin Mehta son of Shri Krishan Kumar, resident of 242, Aggarwal Colony, Sirsa, through his special attorney Krishan Kumar son of Shri Jagat Narain, resident of 242, Aggarwal Colony, Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Flipkart Internet Private Limited, Vaishnavi Summit No. 6/B, 7th Main, 80 feet Road, 3rd Block, Koramangala, Bangalore- 560034 India through its Managing Director.
2. Hitachi India Private Limited, 508, Ascot Centre, Next to Hilton Hotel, Sahar Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400099 through its Managing Director.
3. Hitachi Service Centre, Shiv Chowk, Near Namdhari Gurudwara, B-Block, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa- 125055, through its Incharge.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI PADAM SINGH THAKUR…………….PRESIDENT.
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR………………… MEMBER.
SHRI OM PARKASH TUTEJA ……………MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Krishan Kumar father of complainant in person.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite parties no.1 to 3.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) through his father Krishan Kumar against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that on 10.04.2019 through online complainant booked one Hitachi Air conditioner through op no.1 and paid Rs.28,871/- through credit card and air conditioner of one ton four star split inverter bearing IMEI/ Serial No. CSF412HCEA-190C2/9403 was delivered to him on 13.04.2019 by op no.1 alongwith invoice dated 11.04.2019. The op no.1 is authorized dealer, op no.2 is customer care centre and op no.3 is manufacturing company. The ops gave guarantee for a period of one year of the air conditioner. It is further averred that mother of complainant was suffering from cyst (Rasoli) and she was operated on 23.06.2019 and for her care the above said AC was got installed but due to non performance of said AC, his mother suffered badly. That after installation, it worked fine only for 15 days and thereafter started to show signs with no cooling while it was still in warranty. The complainant contacted op no.1 and op no.3 in this regard but they failed to provide proper services to the complainant and somehow op no.1 sent a person after a lot of ill-mannered dealing with the local Hitachi Care Centre because the Flipkart stated that return period is over. It is further averred that again air conditioner worked fine for sometime and after that again same thing happened after three weeks and now the ops are not taking any responsibility instead they are saying that they will have to pay for this product repair as there is some internal leakage since beginning. That ops have wrongly and illegally closed the case of complainant without providing any proper service to him and also without repairing the AC and in fact there is a manufacturing defect in the AC and it is liable to be replaced with new one but the ops are avoiding their legal and lawful duties. That the act and conduct of the ops comes under the ambit of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice due to which complainant is suffering recurring financial losses and unnecessary harassment. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed its written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that op no.1 provides online market place platform/ technology to the sellers and buyers of products to facilitate the transactions, electronic commerce for various goods between respective buyers and sellers. The op no.1 is mere an intermediary providing online platform to the buyers of the products. The complainant has grievances only against ops no.2 and 3 for not providing after sales services and he has not raised a single specific issue or grievance against answering op. It is further submitted that whenever the complainant had approached the answering op, he was attended to properly but the issue of the product cannot be handled by answering op as it is in the domain of manufacturer or its service centre. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 prayed for.
4. Ops no. 2 and 3 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that as per the complaint, the complainant has purchased the said product from op no.1 namely Flipkart Internet which is merely a reseller of the product manufactured by Johnson Controls- Hitachi Air Conditioning India Ltd. whereas op no.2 is mis joinder of party that is a separate legal entity deals in some railways and infrastructure projects and op no.3 is an authorized service centre who is just a service provider of the company. It is further submitted that no such document is attached with the complaint which shows any communication if made by the complainant with op no.3 and as per the warranty policy, if there will be any issue/ problem with the said product then the company shall repair the same free of cost. However, in case of damage to the product or if any of the terms and conditions of the warranty policy is violated or the warranty period is expired, then the warranty policy shall be void and the product shall be repaired on chargeable basis to be paid by the customer. It is further submitted that defect as alleged by complainant cannot be determined without proper analysis or test of the product. It is also submitted that as per condition of warranty, replacement of the product or refund is expressly excluded. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of the complaint made.
5. Complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1, copies of documents i.e. invoice of another AC purchased by him on 17.06.2020 Ex.C2, invoice dated 11.4.2019 Ex.C3, email Ex.C4 and medical record of his mother Ex.C5.
6. On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Amit Pratap Singh authorized signatory of op no.1 as Ex.R1, affidavit of Sh. Mohamad Afzal Vohra, authorized representative of op no.3 as Ex.R2, copy of warranty card Ex.R3 and guidelines for Foreign Direct Investment on E-commerce Ex.R4.
7. We have heard learned counsel for parties and have perused the case file carefully.
8. Sh. Krishan Kumar who is father complainant and duly authorized by complainant to conduct proceedings on his behalf has contended that ops have supplied a defective air conditioner in question to the complainant as same became defective just within few days and same could not be repaired and made defect free by ops despite several requests to the ops and they have also failed to replace or refund the price of the defective air conditioner. He has further contended that complainant purchased the air conditioner in question from ops as Smt. Nirmla mother of complainant and his wife was got operated for removing a cyst (Rasoli) and air conditioner was required for her but the very purpose of purchase of air conditioner was defeated and due to non performance of air conditioner, Smt. Nirmla also suffered badly and now they have purchased another air conditioner of Carrier company as per invoice dated 17.6.2020 Ex.C2 and therefore, they are entitled to refund of the defective air conditioner in question which is having manufacturing defect.
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for ops contended that complainant has failed to prove on record that air conditioner is having any manufacturing defect. Moreover, complainant has also failed to establish on record that they ever registered any complaint with the company or its service centre and op no.1 has no other role to play except delivery of the ordered product which was duly delivered to the complainant.
10. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties. From the invoice Ex.C3, it is evident that on 10.04.2019 through online complainant purchased the air conditioner in question of Hitachi company for a sum of Rs.28,871/- through op no.1 and air conditioner was provided to the complainant at his address by op no.1 vide invoice Ex.C3. The air conditioner in question is manufactured by op no.2. The complainant has alleged manufacturing defect in the air conditioner in question just after purchase of the same and according to the complainant same could not be made defect free by the ops despite repair and his several requests. A report was sought from the Service Center of Samsung company on the application of complainant about defect in the air conditioner in question and the said service center vide its report dated 26.09.2023 reported that there is no cooling due to internal gas leakage. Further complainant has also placed on file a report dated 02.03.2023 of Platinum Services, Sirsa in which also it is reported about Gas Leakage in Condenser of indoor unit and outdoor unit and both unit are not repairable. So it is proved on record that air conditioner is having manufacturing defect and same is not repairable and complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment. The complainant has also proved on record that they have purchased another air conditioner for a sum of Rs.33,000/- as per invoice Ex.C2 as there was acute requirement of the air conditioner for them for his mother. As such complainant is entitled to refund of the amount of Rs.28,871/- i.e. price of the air conditioner in question besides compensation for harassment from the ops.
11. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay the amount of Rs.28,871/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be entitled to receive the above said amount of Rs.28,871/- from ops alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment. We also direct the ops to further pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. All the ops are jointly and severally liable to comply with this order. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced : Member Member President,
Dated: 16.11.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
