Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/21/72

Surjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hind Electric Store - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

02 Sep 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROPAR

                       Consumer Complaint No. : 72 of 24.9.2021

                        Date of decision                    :   02.09.2022

 

Surjit Singh son of Sh. Gian Singh, resident of VPO Shri Chamkaur Sahib, Ward No.9, Near Indian Bank, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar  

                                                        ......Complainant

                                             Versus

1. Hind Electric Store, Shop No.1959, Old No.1966/A, Bela Chowk, Rupnagar, Tehsil & District Rupnagar  
2. Officers at Usha Care, Usha International Limited, Plot No.15, Institutional Area, Sector 32, Gurugram, 122001, Haryana. 

   ...Opposite Parties

                        Complaint under Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                        SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

                        SMT. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY

 

Sh. Surjit Singh, complainant in person  

Sh. Sumit Pasricha, Adv. counsel for O.P No.1

Sh. Varun Garg, Adv. for OP No.2

 

ORDER

SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the complainant had purchased the cooler of Usha Company on 16.07.2021 from the dealer of the company. The complainant had run the cooler and paid the due price. After this the dealer said that I will deliver the cooler to your house Shri Chamkaur Sahib at my own risk. This cooler was sent to his house by Shri Chamkaur Sahib from Rupnagar through dealer by his own means. At the spot the while four sides of cooler was seems to be laminated of scratched cooler and float ball of the cooler was totally broken and fell down the surface of the cooler. It seemed as the old cooler, he had given me, did not look like the one he had seen at the dealer’s shop. When he talked to the dealer about it, he said that Usha Company should lodge a complaint and they will solve your problem. Once a technician came from the company and he also said that this cooler was given to you by the dealer as old piece. At that time, the technician also talked to the dealer about the old cooler. The dealer replied that it is the responsibility of the company and the company has to fix it.  After repeated requests, the OPs has failed to resolve the issue of the complainant.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service, the complainant sought the following relief against the Ops:-

1. To direct the opposite party/Usha Company to replace the new cooler instead of old cooler   .
2. To pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation 
3. To pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.      In reply, the OP No.1 has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the complaint is not maintainable against the answering OP; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP1 towards the complainant and complainant intentionally involve the OP No.1 in his complaint; that the complainant does not come before this Commission with clean hands as the complainant never visit the office of OP No.1 after the purchase of the said cooler and he directly himself on the basis of wrong facts approached to OP No.2 and narrated a false, concocted and wrong story. At the time of purchasing the said cooler, the OP No.1 has cleared all the things about the said cooler and thereafter the complainant check the same practically in running condition and OP No.1 has packed the same in the presence of the complainant and even after satisfaction from the OP No.1 regarding the cooler, the complainant has purchased the cooler and he himself arranged the vehicle for the delivery of cooler and just to get new cooler or extort money from the OP No.1. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.

3.      In reply, the OP No.2 has taken preliminary objection; that the present complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has not come before this Commission with clean hands and the complainant is guilty of suppression, concealment and misrepresentations of the true and material facts from this Hon’ble Commission; that the complainant is not a consumer of the answering OP; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP; that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint; that the complaint is false, frivolous and unwarranted and against the settled principle of law; that the present complaint deserves no standing before this Commission in view of the fact that the complainant never served any legal notice upon the answering OP. On merits, it is stated that the OP company was manufactured world class product and before sale every product was duly checked by its fully qualified engineers/technicians. The complainant has filed this wasteful litigation before this Hon’ble Commission in order to defame the brand name of the OP company. The complainant contacted the customer care number of the answering OP on 19.7.2021 and registered complaint CC2107191622 that Air cooler was not working. After that the engineer of the answering OP visited at complainant site and after inspect the said product was found OK as per technical specification but the complainant was demanded for replacement due plastic part broken. The engineer of the answering OP tried to convince the complainant that product is running well and the company will change floats valve on FOC base as a special case but the complainant was not agree to accept it the complainant. He want only replacement and second complaint raised by the complainant on 24.7.2021 after receiving the said complaint the engineer of the answering OP visited at complainant site then again complainant demanded to change air cooler on FOC. Then the engineer of the answering OP communicated to customer that plastic parts cannot cover in warranty and the complainant again contact the customer care and registered the complaint on 29.07.2021 and the same day the engineer called him for appointment then the complainant refused to give appointment and he want only replacement. Rest of the allegations made by the complainant against the answering OP have been denied and prayed for dismissal the complaint.

 3.     The learned counsel for the parties have tendered certain documents in support of their version and closed the evidence.

4.      We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record file, carefully and minutely.

5.                From the perusal of the documents placed on record by both the parties, we feel, that after the purchase of the cooler in question, it was giving trouble and the complainant made several requests for the OPs but all in vain.  Coming to the real controversy, whether the complainant has been able to prove the illegal Act or unfair trade practice that point is to be appreciated in the light of pleadings and evidence.

6.      Complainant pleaded that the Air Cooler of Usha make was sold and since the date of purchase that was not functioning properly. The bill of the Air Cooler Usha make was sold.  At the same time, the complainant placed on file the bill dated 16.7.2021 bearing No.392 and i.e. of one Usha Air Cooler.  

7.      After appreciating the bill Ex.C2 relied upon by the complainant dated 16.7.2021 bearing No.392 is issued by the O.P. in the name of the complainant with regard to the product of Usha. The complainant has placed on record the copy of complaints through messages to the company again and again but the company has not resolved the issue of the complainant. Whereas, the company is duty bound to satisfy their customers. 

8.      In the light of the discussions made above, the complaint stands allowed with the direction to the OP No.2 to replace the cooler in question within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The OP No.2 is further directed to pay Rs.3000/- as compensation to the complainant. certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The files be consigned to record room.

  

ANNOUNCED                                                                                       (RANJIT SINGH)

          Dated.02.09.2022                                                 PRESIDENT
 

 

 

                                               

                                                                  (RANVIR KAUR)

                                                                                      MEMBER