DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.
CC.No. 374 of 07-08-2012
Decided on 17-10-2012
Sukhvir Singh aged about 32 years son of Gulzar Singh son of Hazoora Singh, resident of Maiserkhana, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo & District Bathinda.
........Complainant
Versus
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd, Appliance Division, Plant 11, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai 400079; through its CEO.
M/s Gupta Electronics, Bohar Wala Chowk, Maur Mandi, District Bathinda; through its proprietor.
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.
Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.
Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.
Present:-
For the Complainant: Sh.Sukhpal Singh, counsel for the complainant.
For Opposite parties: Sh.Rajinder Sharma, counsel for opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 ex-parte.
ORDER
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that on 16.8.2011 the complainant has purchased a washing machine make Godrej 7 kg manufactured by the opposite party No.1 from the opposite party No.2 and paid Rs.8800/- in cash and at the time of its purchase the opposite party No.2 assured about the trouble free service of the said washing machine and also informed that it carries warranty/guarantee of one year from the date of its purchase. After about 6 months of use the said washing machine started giving problem as it started going 'off ' all of sudden in motion and on one occasion the rotator came off and hit the top cover of the said washing machine as a result of which it got cracked. The complainant lodged the complaint with the company on its customer care number and the engineer of the company came and attended to the problem and repair it but after sometime it again started giving the same problem. The complainant again lodged a complaint on the toll free number and an engineer of the company visited and after attending to the problem told him that the said washing machine is having some manufacturing defect in it and it needs replacement. On 20.7.2012 the said washing machine again went out of order and the complainant again lodged a complaint on toll free No.18002092255 on 21.7.2012 and he was given complaint No.2107937172 but nothing has been done and the said washing machine is lying unserviceable. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking the directions to the opposite parties to refund the price of said washing machine alongwith cost and compensation or any other alternative relief to which the complainant is found entitled.
2. The notice was served to the opposite parties. Sh. Rajinder Sharma, Authorized Representative of the opposite party No.1 has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.1 and has filed its separate written statement and pleaded that there is no mention of date, complaint number or the name of the Engineer who visited the residence of the complainant. The opposite party No.1 confirmed the complaint which they have received from the complainant through their toll free number 18002092255 on 21.7.2012 and lodged a complaint vide their complaint No.2107937172 as per their normal practice. They attended this complaint on the same day by adjusting the Wash Timer Wire and according to their records the complainant has not lodged any other complaint after that. In case the same is not in perfect working condition they are ready to attend the same as per their warranty terms. No other complaint except the complaint dated 21.7.2012 was made by the complainant to the opposite parties.
3. Sh.Suresh Sharma has appeared in person and filed its reply on 12.9.2012 on behalf of the opposite party No.2 and after that none has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2. Therefore ex-parte proceedings are taken against the opposite party No.2.
4. The opposite party No.2 pleaded that the complainant has lodged the complaint with the opposite party No.2 and it had given toll free number to him for lodging the complaint with the consumer care of the opposite party No.1 and despite the visit of engineer of the opposite party No.1 the said washing machine could not be repaired. The opposite party No.2 had informed the opposite party No.1 about the unserviceability and requested them to attend the problem in the said washing machine. As the opposite party No.2 had sold the said washing machine to the complainant and service was to be rendered by the opposite party No.1 as such the opposite party No.2 is not responsible for the harassment to the complainant.
5. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
6. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
7. The admitted facts between the parties are that the complainant has purchased the washing machine make Godrej 7 kg manufactured by the opposite party No.1 from the opposite party No.2 against cash payment of Rs.8800/-. The warranty was given by the company for one year. The fault regarding the rotator occurred during the warranty period. The complaint dated 21.7.2012 was received by the opposite party No.1 on their toll free No. 18002092255 and the complaint was lodged vide their complaint No. 2107937172.
8. The disputed facts between the parties are that after the use of 6 months the said washing machine started giving problem as it started going 'off ' all of sudden in motion and the rotator came off and hit the top cover of the said washing machine as a result of which it got cracked. The complainant has lodged the complaint to the opposite party No.1 on its customer care number and the engineer of the company visited and after attending to the problem told him that the said washing machine is having some manufacturing defect in it and it needs replacement. On 20.7.2012 the said washing machine again went out of order and complaint lodged on toll free No. 18002092255 but nothing has been done and the said washing machine is lying unserviceable.
9. The opposite party No.1 submitted that only one complaint dated 21.7.2012 was received vide complaint No. 2107937172 which was duly attended by them. As the Wash Timer Wire was adjusted and thereafter the complainant had not lodged any complaint till date.
10. The opposite party No.2 has filed its reply in which it has informed the opposite party No.1 about the unserviceability of the said washing machine and requested them to attend the problem in the said washing machine and also mentioned in para No.4 of its reply that despite the visit of engineer of the opposite party No.1 the said washing machine could not be repaired but thereafter the opposite party No.2 never appeared before this Forum to file any evidence to support its version mentioned in its reply or has given any supporting document and moreover the opposite party No.2 has not appeared before this Forum at the time of final arguments on the present complaint.
11. The engineer of the opposite party No.1 visited the premises of the complainant to check the said washing machine but the defect was not rectified. The complainant has placed on file Ex.C4 the job card which shows the few minor defects in the said washing machine. The complainant has not placed on file any expert evidence to prove that there is any major defect or any manufacturing defect in the washing machine in question. In the absence of any expert evidence it cannot believed that there is any manufacturing defect. Therefore the defects mentioned by the complainant in his complaint and the defect shown in Ex.C4 are minor in nature which can be rectified.
12. Therefore keeping in view the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file, this complaint is partly allowed against the opposite party No.1 with Rs.2000/- as cost and compensation and dismissed qua the opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.1 is directed to rectify all the defects mentioned in the job card Ex.C4 to the entire satisfaction of the complainant and also get the job sheet duly signed by the complainant to his entire satisfaction before handing over the said machine to him after rectification. At the same time the complainant will check the proper working of the said machine before taking its delivery. The compliance of this order be done within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
13. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in open Forum:-
17-10-2012
Vikramjit Kaur Soni
President
Amarjeet Paul
Member
Sukhwinder Kaur
Member
