Date of filing:- 03/02/2015

Date of Order:- 09/12/2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Dispute Case No. 06 of 2015.

Mrs. Asha Pansari, wife of Purusottam Pansari , aged about 50(Fifty)years resident of Bargarh, P.O./P.S. Bargarh, Tahasil/Munsafi- Bargarh, Dist. Bargarh,

..... ..... ....... Complainant.

• V e r s u s -

(1)Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Priojashra Nagar, Vikroli, Mumbai (Maharastra),

(2) Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd, High way Complex, Rudrapur, Pahala, Bhubaneswar, Dist. Khurdha,

(3) Amit Agrawal, Proprietor of M/S. Chandan Brothers Bargarh near bazar, Kolkata P.O./P.S./ Bargarh, District. Bargarh.

..... ..... ..... Opposite Party

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :- Sri.S.S. Shukla with other Advocates.

For the Opposite Party :- Ex-parte.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Mrs Anjali Behera ..... ..... ..... .... M e m b e r.(w)I/c President.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ......... ..... M e m b e r.

Dt.09/12/2015. -: J U D G E M E N T:-

Presented by Smt.Anjali Behera, Member(w) I/c President.

Fact of the Case :-

Complainant alleges deficiency of service against the Opposite Parties and files this Complaint for suitable compensation for the problem, difficulties suffered an account of purchase of a Godrej Refrigerator on 31/08/2008. At the time of purchase the Opposite Parties company had announced a 10(ten) years warranty offer vide 10 years Rust protection plan on the body of the refrigerator and accordingly purchased the Refrigerator bearing Model No. GFE 36 DY(MS) Serial No.50802210423. But the product got rusted in between the active warranty period decreasing the efficacy and beauty of the product. Complainant intimated the problem to Opposite Party No.3(three) the local dealer to take steps to redress her grievance, though Opposite Party No.3(three) assured to take steps actually done nothing. Complainant also sent e-mail to Opposite Party No.1(one) about the issue who have turned deaf ears even after sending of pleaders notice.

Hence Complainant files this case alleging deficiency of service and retain trade practice and seeks to be suitable compensated and claims a sum of Rs.39,300/-(Rupees thirty nine thousand three hundred)only from the Opposite Parties, with future interest, cost of the proceeding.

Complainant relies on the following documents filed by them to substantiate her case.

1. Retail Invoice of the purchase of the refrigerator.

2. Warranty copy.

3. Copy of user guide.

4. Copy of e-mail sent to Opposite Party No.1(one).

5. Copy of registration receipt.

6. Copy of pleaders notice.

7. Copy of reply to legal notice to Opposite Parties, through their advocate Dt.13/11/2014 about solving the issue.

8. Photographs (4nos) of the refrigerator in issue.

On being admitted for adjudication Opposite Parties noticed to appear and file their version. SR back from Opposite Party No.3(three), but not from Opposite Party No.1(one) and No.2(two), however as per provisions one can assum a complete service of notice to the Opposite Parties. Further though SR back from Opposite Party No.3(three) but he did not turned up before the forum and ever after a lots of time allowed forum set ex-parte the Opposite Parties and ex-parte hearing was done where the counsel of the Complainant submitted their case in great detail referring the documents.

After hearing carefully the submission of Complainant on hearing perusal of the petition and documents filed with the record and considers the following points arriving at the decision.

1. Purchase of the refrigerator and 10(ten) years warranty on the body from rust is proved through the documents filed and the refrigerator was within warranty period at the time of filing of this Complaint.

2. Complainants claim about contacting the local dealer and Opposite Party No.1(one) is proved through filed documents.

3. Steps taken at the end of Opposite Party No.1(one) is proved through but it seems that it was not completed for reasons.

4. The photographs filed with the case record shows rust but they are photographs showing parts and corner, having rust but only from that it can not be ensured that if is the same refrigerator in issue.

5. As per the warranty conditions it is quite clean that company will repaint the part on entire refrigerator free of cost. But not addressing the grievances of a genuine consumer Opposite Parties have fouled over the agreement of purchase and hence deficiency of services occurred. Though Opposite Party No.1(one) took a step after the pleaders notice perhaps no further action were taken up after them and they have also not followed up. But they are still tied up with the responsibilities been in principal and agent relationship. But it is also evident that the Opposite Party No.3(three) who is the local point to cater to the problem did not took right steps forwarding the customer to service point.

Under the facts and circumstances discussed above Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable of deficiency of service as alleged by the Complainant.

O R D E R

1. Opposite Parties directed to repaint the entire refrigerator vide Model No. GFE 36 DY(MS) Serial No.50802210423 with one month of receipt of the refrigerator at service point or local dealer. Opposite Parties are directed to take steps to pick up the Refrigerator in issue vide Model No. GFE 36 DY(MS) Serial No.50802210423 from the house of the Complainant for servicing Opposite Parties will bear the cost of transportation for both picking up the Refrigerator as well as delivering the same to the house of the Complainant.

2. Opposite Parties will pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand)only to the Complainant for the mental agony received and that includes litigation cost within one month of this order, failing which, the award amount carries interest @6%(six percent) per annum till final payment of the award amount.

Disposed accordingly.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

( Smt. Anjali Behera)

I agree, M e m b e r. I/c President.

(Sri. Pradeep Kumar Dash)

M e m b e r.