DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.521 of 2016
Date of institution: 30.08.2016 Date of decision : 11.07.2017
Bhagwant Singh S/o Sh. Shadi Singh, R/o House No. 1828, Randhawa Road, Kharar, District, Mohali through LR:
(i) Mrs. Amarjit Kaur - Wife
….Complainant
Versus
1. Health Sure Water SCO 202, Sector 45-B, Back Side Govt. Middle School, Chandigarh, Through its Managing Director.
2. Kaushal Enterprises, Building No 236, Near Adarsh Public School Burail, Sector 45–C, Chandigarh through its Managing Director.
3. Health sure Water SCO 1771-72, Sector 45-D,Top Floor, Chandigarh, Through its Managing Director.
…..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum
Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member
Present: Shri Aksh Chetal, counsel for the complainants.
None for the OPs.
ORDER
By Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Originally Bhagwant Singh had filed the present complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act but during pendency of the complaint, he expired and his aforesaid LR was impleaded vide order dated 20.12.2016. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
On 01.10.15 the complainant received a telephonic call from the OPs about the features of their product and that they are providing Aquafresh R.O System to the customers at the price of Rs.7500/- and also told the complainant that their product is best in class of the products available in the market, having all the features of RO+UF+TDS controller in it. The complainant was further appraised that OPs company is working on NO PROFIT NO LOSS basis and that is why, their company is providing the best in class product at a nominal price of Rs.7500/- which comes with a lifelong warranty period (i.e. no service charge will be charged for the life time) and also with a complete warranty period of one year (no services charges plus no charges for replacement of any part or its repair). The concerned official of the OPs had also told to the complainant that they are providing this R.O system on the Installment basis also. The concerned official of the OPs also assured the complainant that their official shall visit the residence of the complainant after every three months for the purpose of maintenance and servicing. On the assurance of the officials of OPs, the complainant asked them to install the R.O system at his residence at Kharar. Accordingly, the official of the OPs installed the R.O system on 02.10.15 at the residence of the complainant and also provided a warranty card. However, no bill/invoice has been issued to the complainant for purchasing the said R.O system till date despite assurance to provide a copy of same within a day or two. The complainant had paid a sum of Rs 1500/- at the time of installation of R.O and issued four cheques of Rs 1500/- each to the concerned official of OPs. Every month, the OPs returned one of the above said cheques to the complainant and in return received Rs.1500/- cash as the installment of R.O system. After expiry of first three months, complainant had called at the customer care number of the OPs for getting the maintenance and servicing of R.O system and the attending official of OPs had assured the complainant that within two days, the official of OPs shall visit at his residence and will do the service. But despite assurance, no official of the OPs visited the complainant residence. Thereafter, the complainant made a number of telephonic calls on the customer care number. But despite the assurances no official of the OPs visited the complainant residence till date. Due to non service of the Aquafresh R.O. system, the water is not being purified and the complainant and his family are using unpurified water. The complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite parties on 25.06.16 but the same were not received by the opposite parties and came back to the complainant being undelivered. Hence this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to refund Rs.7500/- alongwith interest @ 18% from the date of purchase till realisation; to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. The complaint is contested by the OPs by filing reply in which the OPs took preliminary objections that the there is no cause of action arisen against the OPs and that the complaint is bad for non joinder and mis-joinder of the parties. This Forum does not have the jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. On merits, it is pleaded that their representative visited the complainant and provided necessary services to the RO system. During the visit of representative of the OPs, it was informed to the complainant that filters/membrane component is damaged and these components are not covered by the warranty and the complainant has to pay for it for change of this component as it is clearly mentioned in the warranty card issued by the company. Thus, denying any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, the OPs have sought dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of Mrs. Amarjit Kaur wife/LR of the complainant Ex. CW-1/1; copies of warranty card Ex.C-1; bill-cum-receipts Ex.C-2 to C-6; copies of legal notices alongwith postal receipts Ex.C-7 to C-10 and envelopes containing undelivered legal notices Ex.C-11 to C-13. The OPs failed to tender any documents in their evidence inspite imposing cost of Rs.500/-. However, neither the documents tendered in evidence by the OPs nor the cost was paid to the complainant. Hence, the evidence of the Ops was closed by order on 23.05.2017.
5. We have heard the counsel for the complainant and gone through the contents of the file.
6. The complainant had asserted in his complaint that the OPs have provided to him a life long warranty period and also with a complete warranty for one year (no service charges plus no charges for replacement of any part or its repair) for the R.O. system. In reply to the complaint, the OPs are taking two contradictory stand. On one side in para No.2 of reply on merits they are admitting the contents of Para No.2 of the complaint in which as per the complainant the OPs have appraised him about a life long warranty period and also with one year complete warranty and on the other side in Para No.5 of reply on merits the OPs are relying on sub clause 4 of the Warranty Card and replying that the damaged component (filters/membrane) of the Aquafresh R.O. system is not covered under warranty as checked by the representative of the OPs.
7. Accordingly the LR of the complainant led evidence i.e. affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith some other documents i.e. Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-13 but the OPs have not led any cogent documentary evidence to support their assertion. So, keeping in view the evidence led by the LR of the complainant, we hold that the OPs are deficient in service by not providing the service and also committed unfair trade practice.
8. The complaint stands allowed accordingly and the OPs are directed to refund to the LR of the complainant the amount of all the installments which are paid by the complainant/his LR to the OPs for the R.O. system and further to pay them Rs.12,000/- (Rs. Twelve thousand only) for harassment and mental agony and litigation costs.
The OPs are further directed to comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount of compensation awarded shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till realisation.
The arguments on the complaint were heard and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced
Dated: 11.07.2017
(A.P.S.Rajput)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
