Delhi

North East

CC/192/2018

Ranjan Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

G.K. Service - Opp.Party(s)

07 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.192/18

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Ranjan Kumar S/o Sh. Subhash Chand R/o H.No. C-183, Gali No. 7, Ganga Vihar, Near Gokalpuri, Delhi-110094	Complainant
	Versus
1.           2.   3.	G.K Service Behand Vishal Mega Mart, Rana Pratap Gali, Near Durga puri Chowk, Babarpur, Chajjupur Delhi-110032 Sargam India Electronics B-8, Model Town, New Delhi-110009 Voltas Limited Through The Director A-43, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, Delhi-110044	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:                                      JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                                                        DATE OF ORDER:

10.09.2018                  05.07.2022                  07.12.2022

 

 

 

CORAM:                                                                                                     

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

 

 

ORDER

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1.  The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant purchased an AC manufactured by the Opposite Party No. 3 i.e Voltas Company from the Opposite Party No. 2 vide invoice no. SMT 02399 dated 12.05.2016. The model No. Of AC is SAC Voltas 183VDC Inverter and cost is Rs. 41,600/- as well as stablizer cost Rs. 2,000/-. Opposite Party No. 2 further told the Complainant that there would be  5 years warranty of the said AC. The above mentioned AC worked normally just for a season i.e. in 2016 for few months. But when the Complainant started AC in 2017 for the first time, the AC was found not giving cooling effect. The Complainant did complaint to the Opposite Party No. 2. The Opposite Party No. 2 declined to repair the AC in question and asked the Complainant to lodge complaint on customer care no. of AC. The Complainant requested Opposite Party No. 2 to replace the AC which had been used for only one season. The Complainant had approached Delhi Govt. Mediation Centre in May 2017 with the complaint of AC in question, where the Opposite party No. 3 appeared through their Counsel and the Opposite Party No. 3 agreed to repair the AC of the Complainant before 27.06.2017. The Opposite Party No. 3 also provided extended warranty for one year. It if further agreed that the period of one year warranty should start from the date of handover of repaired AC in Excellent working condition. After that once again AC was not working in July 2017 and the Complainant was feeling lots of discomfort due to non working of AC in its second season only. The Complainant lodged a complaint on the customer care of Opposite Party No. 3 and the Opposite Party No. 1 visited to repair the AC on 31.07.2017. The technician found fault in Condenser Coil Defective. The outdoor condenser coil was changed and gas was also filled up. Once again on 19.08.2017 the AC in question developed new problem of water leakage and non cooling effect. The Complainant once again registered complaint on customer care no. Of Voltas and the technician from Opposite Party No. 1 visited the place of Complainant to repair the AC in question and Compressor was changed and once again Gas was filled by him. The Complainant once again started his AC in question for next season i.e. May 2018 and the AC was having same complaint and the AC was not working and not giving cooling effect. The technician visited to repair the AC and found that Gas leakage in the AC. The technician however filled new Gas on 07.05.2018 despite that AC was not working and there was no cooling effect as now. The Complainant once again filed complaint with Mediation Centre, unfortunately Opposite party No. 3 failed to appear and the case was closed by the Mediation Centre on 21.08.2018. The Complainant made several calls at the customer care no. Of Voltas but the Opposite Party No. 1 & 3 are paying no heed to the request of the Complainant. The Complainant has prayed to direct the Opposite Parties to pay cost of the AC i.eRs. 41,600/- with interest @ 12 % p.a., to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards mental harassment and to pay a sum of Rs. 21,000/- towards cost of litigation charges.
2. None has appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1. Hence, right of Opposite Party for filing the written statement closed vide order dated 13.02.2019.

Case of Opposite Party No. 2

3. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement. It is stated by the Opposite Party that the Complainant had purchased one AC on dated 12.05.2016 manufactured by Voltas from Opposite Party No. 2 vide invoice no. SMT-02399. It is submitted by the Opposite Party No. 2 that Opposite Party No. 2 had given sealed pack and new AC to the Complainant and as per complaint the said AC had worked satisfactorily one full year after the purchase. It is further submitted that Opposite party No. 2 provide the warranty given by manufacturer i.e. 03 and Opposite Party No. 3 is the right and appropriate parte to resolve the genuine complaint of Complainant.

Case of Opposite Party No. 3

4. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement. It is stated by the Opposite Party that the Complainant purchased the product in question in 12.05.2016 and the warranty of the said product expired in May 2017. It is submitted that the Opposite party No. 3 had received the complaint from the Complainant in the month of July 2017 that the AC in question is occurring the problem on non-cooling, accordingly the same was inspected and there was gas leakage in the aforesaid AC. It is submitted that the gas leakage problem which occurred to the AC in question was because of toxic gases emanate from the highly polluted canal (NALA) nearby which house of the Complainant is situated and despite the same the Opposite Party No. 3 has changed the Condenser and Cooling Coil of the AC in question at the company cost. After that Opposite Party No. 3 had again received the complaint from the Complainant in the month of August 2017 for non-cooling of the AC in question. IT is submitted that as the Complainant is well in the knowledge aware about the reason behind frequent problem in the aforesaid AC in question i.e. because of the corrosion of gas pipe caused by highly toxic gases emanating from the polluted canal (NALA) along with the house of the Complainant is situated and not by any defect in the AC in question and for the same the Opposite Party No. 3 relies on the article published in newspaper i.e HINDUSTAN TIMES on dated 04.05.2012 which express concern regard health hazard and damages to the air conditioner caused by the highly poisonous gases emanating from Yamuna river and sewage/canals of Delhi. Even then the Opposite party No. 3 as a good gesture replaced the Compressor free of cost and filled the gas in the aforesaid unit without charging single penny from the Complainant. The problem faced by the Complainant is not because of fault in the AC but due to toxic gases emanating from the polluted canal (NALA) along with the house of the Complainant for which the Opposite Party is not liable. It is further stated that the unit in question bears no manufacturing defect or deficiency. All the services with respect to the said product were provided in time and with due effect as per calls. The same is duly reflected in the job sheet so relied upon by the Complainant in his complaint and which also shows that the Complainant enjoyed flawless services from the Opposite Party No. 3 without spending a single penny from his pocket. In view of the aforesaid facts, reasons and circumstances it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon’ble Forum that the complaint of the Complainant be dismissed with heavy cost and Opposite Party No. 3 be awarded with cost of litigation.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party No. 2

5. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statements of Opposite Party No. 2 wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party No. 2 and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party No. 3

6. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statements of Opposite Party No. 2 wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Party No. 2 and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint. It is submitted that AC had been installed by the Opposite party No. 1 G.K Service. It is denied that guarantee of AC had been expired. The Complainant had approached Delhi Govt. Mediation Centre in May 2017 with the complaint in AC in question, where the Opposite Party No. 3 appeared through their counsel and the Opposite party No. 3 agreed to repair the AC of the Complainant before 27.06.2017. The Opposite Party No. 3 also provided extended warranty for one more year. It is further agreed that the period of one year warranty shall start from the date of handover of repaired AC in Excellent Working condition. It is denied that AC has no manufacturing defect.

Evidence of the Complainant

7. The Complainant in support of her case filed her affidavit wherein she has supported the assertions made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Party No. 2

8. In order to prove its case Opposite Party has filed affidavit of Shri. Manoj Kumar, AR for M/s Sargam (I) Electronics Pvt. Ltd having head office at Garg trade Centre Plot No. 1, 3^rd Floor Sector-11 Rohini Delhi- 85wherein the averments made in the written statement have been supported.

Evidence of the Opposite Party No. 3

9. In order to prove its case Opposite Party has filed affidavit of Shri Ravi Sethi, Area Service Manager, Voltas Ltd., B-1/J-2, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi wherein the averments made in the written statement have been supported.

Arguments and Conclusion

10. We have heard the Counsel for the Complainant and Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 & 3. We have also perused the file and written arguments filed by the Complainant and Opposite Party No. 2 & 3. The case of the Complainant is that he purchased an AC manufactured by Opposite Party No. 3 from Opposite Party No. 2 on 12.05.2016 and cost of the AC was Rs. 43,600/- including the cost of stabilizer. It is stated by the Complainant that AC was functioned normally for one season and when AC was started in next season, AC was not giving cooling effect. Then he took up the matter with Opposite Party No. 3 i.e. manufacturer of the AC on the advice of the Opposite Party No. 2. Opposite Party No. 3 repaired the AC twice but AC in question developed new problem of water leakage and cooling effect. As far as Opposite Party No. 2 is considered, he handover the AC to the Complainant in sealed pack and AC had worked satisfactorily for one full year. He has no role of rectify the defect in the functioning of the AC. Opposite Party No. 3 admitted that there were problem in functioning of AC and they repaired the AC on two occasions. Opposite Party contended that non functioning of AC is not because of there is any manufacturing defect but because of toxic gases emanate from the highly polluted canal (NALA) nearby house of the Complainant. Opposite Party No. 3 failed to produce any material regarding non functioning of AC due to toxic gases emanate from the highly polluted canal (NALA) but it is an admitted fact that AC was not functioning properly.
11. In view of the above discussion, complaint is allowed. Opposite Party No. 3 is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 41,600/- to the Complainant along with the interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. Opposite Party No. 3 is also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant along with the interest @ 6 % p.a. on account of mental harassment and litigation charges from the date of this order till recovery. 
12. Order announced on 07.12.2022.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President