Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/244/2022

Ritu Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hari Electronic - Opp.Party(s)

Anirudh

10 Jul 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

                  Consumer Complaint No. : 244 of 2022

                  Date of Institution             : 16.12.2022

                                                           Date of Decision               : 10.07.2024

 

Ritu Rani wife of Sh. Raman Tanwar R/o Manana Panna, Ward No.24, Near Krishna Water Soda Factory, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

 

          ……Complainant.

 

Versus

 

1. Manager/Owner, Hari Electronics Co., Opposite Adarsh Mahila College, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani- 127021.

 

2.  G.M./M.D./Manager, Whirpool, Corporate Office, Plot NO.40, Whirpool House, Sector-44, Gurugram, Haryana-122002.

….. Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 2019.

 

BEFORE:     Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Anirudh, Advocate for complainant.

                    Sh. Rajiv Kaushik, Advocate for OPs.

                    (Defence of OP No.1 struck off).

 

ORDER

Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant purchased an Air Conditioner (in short AC) of Whirpool Company  Model 41230 1.5T Neocool Pro 3S COPR from OP No.1 on 20.03.2022 in Rs.31,500/-. It is stated that the AC stopped working; OPs were informed but they did not resolve the matter.  It is stated that the AC was having warranty for one year and complainant has to wait for rectification of defective AC for about 9 months.  As such, the complainant has submitted that he has been harassed by the act & conduct of OPs resulting into monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment. In the end, prayer has been made to direct the OPs to pay Rs.90,000/- as compensation for harassment and to refund the price of AC i.e. Rs.31,500/- alongwith interest  or to replace the AC with new one of the same model.  Further to pay the litigation expenses incurred by complainant.

2.                 Upon notice, OP No.2 filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua maintainability of complaint, deficiency in service and suppression of material facts. On merits, it is submitted that complainant registered three complaints on 13.06.2022, 16.06.2022 and 23.08.2022 respectively. In the first complaint, coil cleaning was done. In the second, only guidance was given to complainant qua use of remote for setting the temperature and lastly on 23.08.2022, wet servicing of the AC was done. Apart from these 3 routine maintained job, complainant never made any complaint regarding mal-functioning of the AC. It is suggested that the OP company being a leading manufacturing of home appliances in the work has every care about its products and services to customers. In the end, denied for any deficiency in service and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs. 

3.                 OP No.1 did not file written statement despite availing sufficient opportunities, as such, defence of OP No.1 was struck of vide order dated 24.03.2023.

4.                 In evidence of complainant, documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-4 were tendered and closed the evidence.

5.                 On the other side, no evidence tendered on behalf of OPs despite availing sufficient opportunities and the same was closed vide order dated 03.05.2024.

6.                 We have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record carefully.

7.                 From purchase bill (Annexure C-1), it is clear that complainant purchased the AC in question in a sum of Rs.31,500/- from OP No.1 on 20.03.2022. As per pleadings of the OP No.2 company, the complainant has approached it within three months of purchase of the AC and made three complaints, upon which, cleaning of coil of the AC and wet servicing etc. were done. On the other hand, complainant alleged that despite service by the engineers of OP, the AC did not work properly and remained defective qua providing cooling. Complainant in support of his case has placed on record copy of complaints Annexure C-2 to Annexure C-4 which reveal that there was problem in the AC qua cooling etc.

8.                 After hearing and going through the record, it is observed that the AC was having some defect(s) which could not be rectified by the OP No.2. As such, the OP has failed to provide proper services to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service and has caused him mental and physical harassment besides financial loss.  Hence, the complaint is allowed and OP No.2- manufacturer is directed to comply with the following directions within 30 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)       To pay Rs.31,500/-(Rs. Thirty one thousand five hundred) to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till actual realization subject to return of the AC in question.

(ii)      To pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Five thousand) to the complainant as compensation for harassment.

(iii)     Also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rs. Five thousand) as litigation expenses.

                    In case of default, the OP No.2 shall liable to pay simple interest @ 12% per annum on all the aforesaid awarded amounts for the period of default. If this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party no.2 may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both. Certified copies of this order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.  

Announced.

Dated:10.07.2024.