DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. CASE NO. 156/2015
Date of Filing: Date of Admission Date of Disposal:
02.03.2015 12.03.2015 31.08.2015
Complainant/s = Vs. = O.Ps.
Pravas Chakraborty, 1. Godrej & Boyee Mfg. Co. Ltd,
S/o. Late Makhan Lal Chakraborty, (Appliance Division),
146, G. N. S. Sarani, G. N. Block, Section-V,
Shyamnagar Road, Salt Lake, Kolkata.
Kolkata- 700055. 2. Rita Refrigeration,
1/1-19, Aswininagar,
Baguiati, Kolkata-59,
Dist- North 24 Parganas.
Advocate Name for the complainant:- Saroj Kumar Sil.
Advocate Name for the OPs:- X.
P R E S E N T :- Smt. Bandana Roy................President
:- Sri Rabideb Mukhopadhyay......Member
J U D G E M E N T
Facts of the case, in short, is that the complainant purchased one freeze manufactured by the O.P. No.1, being No. GAP2405 and DOP AGE 00000924 dated 24.04.05.
The complainant stated that after the said purchase M/s. Godrej & Boyee Mfg. Co. Ltd assured 3 years service and took liability to change, damage and defective spare parts of the freeze free of cost under A.M.C Scheme and convinced and assured the complainant and being convinced upon their such assurances the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 7,450/- to that effect on 04.10.13 for availing such service upto @ 04.10.16.
The complainant further stated that thereafter from 10.05.14 the said freeze started making disturbances and the complainant informed the matter to their service provider to get service he replace the in ejective spare parts free of costs under the said A.M.C Scheme to run the said freeze and or in active condition.
The complainant also stated that on 10.05.14 one person of service provider of Godrej Bayee Mfg. Co. Ltd (Appliance Division) came the complainant’s house to repair the said freeze but could not able to repair the said
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 2/-
C. C. Case No.-156/2015
- :: 2 :: -
freeze and upon the query of the complainant they contended that the required spare parts are not in stock with them and due to that they will not able to repair the said freeze and to make the said freeze in running condition.
The complainant further stated that since then the said freeze is not working and due to that the complainant is facing very hardship and suffering a lot and has to face financial loss and injury.
The complainant also stated that thereafter on 29.05.14 the complainant sent a letter / notice through his advocate to Godrej Boyee Mfg. Co. Ltd (appliance Division) G. N. Block, Sector- V, Salt Lake, Kolkata with immediate after if they unable to repair the said freeze then to return the entire amount of Rs. 7,450/- only to the complainant which the complaint paid to them under A.M.C Scheme.
The complainant further stated that till date of filing this complaint the said Godrej Boyee Mfg. Co. Ltd neither take any step to repair the said freeze not return the said amount of Rs. 7,450/- only which the complainant paid under A.M.C scheme not only this the said company least bother to inform the complainant anything to that effect.
The complainant also stated that for such act of negligence and violating the terms and conditions of the A.M.C Scheme as promised by the O.Ps the complainant facing hardship day to day and also sustaining the financial loss and injury and mental agency.
The complainant further stated that the family of the complainant is consisting of his old aged heart patient mother, two children and wife and it is very hardship to the complainant to go to the market regularly to purchase dilly green vegetables fish and mean and medicine for his mother but due to deficiency of service of the O.Ps the complainant compelled to spend a substantial valuable time regularly.
The complainant also stated that being a bonafide customer several time requested the O.Ps to make the said freeze in order and or proper running condition but all the requests and endeavors of the complainant are in vain and the O.Ps turned a deal ear to the legitimate claim, demand and request of the complainant. Hence the complaint.
The O.Ps have contested the case by way of filing written version.
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 3/-
C. C. Case No.-156/2015
- :: 3 :: -
The O.Ps stated that on 10.05.15 said the complainant had found some trouble in the refrigerator and informed the O.Ps to come and checked the refrigerator. The O.Ps on the very date had visited the complainant house after received the complaint.
The O.Ps further stated that the qualified technician of the O.Ps had tried their best effort to rectify the same but could not rectify the same since the particular spare parts was not available.
The O.Ps also stated that they clearly conveyed to the complainant that they had already sent the information to their Mumbai Plant to check the availability about the particulars spare parts as the same is not available in local market but after past same days it was confirmed by Mumbai Head Office Plant that particular spare parts was not available with them also.
The O.Ps further stated that the O. Ps finding no other alternative ready to refund the AMC scheme amount and informed the complainant to come at Godrej Salt Lake Office and collected the amount vide intimation letter consignment No. EW791209767IN dated 07.01.15 but no one has come to collect the amount.
The O.Ps also stated that with good gesture the O.Ps had sent the cheque in favour of the complainant through registered speed post vide consignment No. EW829127897IN dated 25.03.15 but the same was returned with remarks that ‘address cannot located’. The O.Ps had again sent the respective cheque through speed post vide consignment No. EW791209767IN dated 04.04.15 but again same has been returned with same remarks as address not found.
The O.Ps further stated that the O.Ps in their good faith offered the alternative proposal at their best as stated earlier and there is no question of deficiency of service as alleged. Hence they prayed for dismissal of the case.
Point for Decision:-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
Complainant has submitted affidavit in chief in support of his contention in the complaint. Complainant submitted the documents in support of his claim. We have perused the documents.
The complainant argued that the O.Ps are contractually liable and bound to fulfill their contractual liabilities as they promised and assured to the complainant
Dictated and corrected Contd. …. 4/-
C. C. Case No.-156/2015
- :: 4 :: -
at the time of execution of the A.M.C service scheme with the complainant. But
neglecting to perform contractual liabilities and providing services to the complainant as assured to the complainant, the complainant seriously prejudiced of deficiency of service. The complainant has prayed for compensation and litigation cost from the O.Ps.
On the other hand O.Ps’ Ld. Lawyer brought to the Forum’s notice that before filing of the case, O.Ps sent the cheques for total amount of Rs. 7,450/- by post but the complainant did not receive the same. O.Ps have filed the envelop along with the copy of cheque it appears from the envelop that there was an endorsement of the postal peon ‘Not Known’. However, it appears that the O.Ps were definitely ready and willing to repair the freeze and all O.Ps returned Rs. 7,450/- to the complainant but it was dated 20.01.15 those cheques not valid. The O.Ps admittedly stated that the complainant is a senior citizen and consisting of his old aged heart patient mother and two children and wife and he has to go to the market regularly to purchase daily requirements but due to deficiency of service of the O.Ps the complainant compelled to spent a substantial valuable time regularly.
In the circumstances, we are of the view , that the O.Ps should repair the freeze and even after repair the freeze, freeze is not properly functioning then the O.Ps will replace the freeze. Accordingly, the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.
Hence
Ordered,
that the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.Ps.
O.Ps are directed to repair the freeze within 15 days from the date of this order and if after repair the freeze is not working properly will replace the same by taking the old freeze.
O.Ps are also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from the date of this order, failing which O.Ps shall have to pay sum of Rs 100/- per day from the date of this order till it realization, as punitive damages, which shall be deposited by the O.Ps in this State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
Member President
Dictated & Corrected by me.
