Delhi

East Delhi

CC/257/2016

DHARAMVEER - Complainant(s)

Versus

HITACHI HOME - Opp.Party(s)

04 Sep 2018

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no           257/ 2016

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                  18/05/2016

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                 04/09/2018

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          05/09/2018  

                                                                                                       

In matter of

Mr. Dharamveer, adult 

S/o Sh  Gurcharam Singh

R/o – F 77, Gali no. 12, Block F,    

Jagatpuri, Krishna Nagar, Delhi 110051 ….……..………………………..Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

 

1-M/s Sargam Electronics,

A-1, Kanti Nagar Extn., Main Road,

Delhi 110032

 

2-M/s Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (India) Ltd.,

A-72, Street No. 5,

Rashid Market, Delhi 110051 …………………………………………………….Opponents

 

Complainant …………………………………..In Person

Opponent’s Advocate……....……………Mr Prashant Arora /Kapoor & Co.

 

Quorum  -     Sh Sukhdev Singh       President

                         Dr P N Tiwari               Member                                                                                                   

                        

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

Brief Facts of the case -

  

Complainant purchased Hitachi 1.5 Ton HWAC, RAU-418HUDS Supreme model from OP1/ Sargam Electronics on 30/04/2015 vide invoice no. SKN-0407, for a sum of Rs 43000/-(Ex CW1/1) with one year standard warranty. It was stated that since very first day, AC was defective as it was not cooling properly, so complaint to OP1 on 20/04/2016 complaint no. 16042003124. It was assured to rectify defect in two day, but no service engineer ever visited complainant’s house. When no response received, complainant again made complaint to OP2. Instead of rectifying defect, complaint was closed on 23/04/2016 (Ex CW1/2 &3).

It was stated that OP1 sold defective goods and were deficient in providing services, so complainant suffered depression and monitory loss, hence filed this complaint and claimed directions from this Forum for getting his AC repaired or refund the cost of the AC Rs 43,000/-with compensation for mental harassment of Rs 50,000/-and litigation charges Rs 5000/-.

 

Notices were served. OP1 / Sargam India Electronics submitted written statement and totally denied all the allegations of complainants as false and incorrect. It was stated that the said AC   was purchased in good quality after proper satisfaction and was delivered in a sealed pack by OP1. It was a false allegation that defective product was purchased. It was also submitted that the said AC worked without any defect till 20/04/2016 when complaint was lodged by complainant vide complaint no. 16042003124. After inspection by the service engineer, it was found that AC was working well and the said complaint was closed on 20/04/2016 and was informed to the complainant also.  It was also submitted that OP1 was an authorised dealer of products of OP2 and was not responsible for any discrepancy or any defects pertaining to the manufacturing products of OP2 whereas the said AC had no manufacturing defect; hence there was no reason for replacement or refund of the cost of AC so the said complaint may be dismissed.  

 

OP2/Hitachi Home & Life Solutions India Ltd was a reputed company who manufacture world class AC models for their customer’s satisfaction.  It was also submitted that their all products had standard one year warranty.  In this case, the first complaint was registered just 10 days before the expiry of warranty tenure, whereas no defect was ever reported by complainant which was rectified without any part replacement or major service work. So this complaint was filed for wrongfully extraction of money. Hence there was no deficiency in services of OP2 or OP1.  

OP2 also submitted references of Vikram Bajaj vs Hind Motors India Ltd. & others, 2009(II)CLT 670 NC and Shivprasad Paper Industries vs Senior Machinery Co., I (2006) CPJ 92 NC, where it was stated that whenever any product had no manufacturing defect, it cannot be ordered for refund or replacement, but can be repaired. Here in this case, no manufacturing defect was ever noticed and AC worked well almost under full warranty tenure. Complainant never complained for any other problem even during the pendency of complaint, hence complaint may be dismissed.  

Complainant submitted his rejoinder to both the written statements and denied all replies submitted by OP1&2. He also filed his evidence through his own affidavit and affirmed on oath that all the facts and evidences were correct and true and all correct facts had been stated in his complaint. Complainant also stated that the last complaint was closed on the last date of warranty ending tenure without rectifying problem (ExCW1/4).

 

OP1 also submitted their evidences on affidavit through Mr. Manoj Kumar, Authorised Representative of OP1 and stated on oath that all the facts were rightly denied by them and said AC was purchased after full satisfaction and sealed pack was delivered and was installed by their service engineer and last and only one complaint was also timely attended and there was no complaint ever made by the complainant. There was no extended warranty taken against the product, so OP1 could not be made liable for any deficiency in services.

 

OP2 also submitted their evidence through Mr. Roopesh Jain, Authorised Representative of OP2 and stated on oath that all their products were of world class and had one year standard warranty and they could also provide extended warranty if their customer wish to get it, but here no extended warranty was taken and the only one complaint which occurred for non cooling just 10 days before the expiry of one year warranty tenure was timely rectified. Hence OP2 could not be liable for any defective product ever made or supplied to their authorised dealers and also the said AC had no manufacturing defect, hence it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.   Written arguments were submitted by OP1 and so taken on record.  

 

Arguments were heard from both the parties at length and order was reserved.   

We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record. We have also seen that the complaint was filed for the deficiency of OP1 for non providing services under defective product was sold as it had non cooling problem just 10 days before the expiry of one year warranty tenure whereas the AC had worked without any trouble for almost one year and that last complaint was timely rectified. More so there was no evidence of service deficiency or manufacturing defect. No concrete evidence was available on record to prove deficiency in service from OP1 or manufacturing defect in the said AC and there was no evidence as AC was defective from the very first day of its purchase.

Hence, we are of the opinion that this complaint is devoid of any merit so deserves to be dismissed so dismissed without any cost. 

 

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 18(1) of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 (in short the CPR) and file be consigned to the Record Room under regulation 20(6) of the CPR.

 

(Dr) P N Tiwari Member                                                                              Mrs Harpreet Kaur  Member                                                                            

                                                 

                                                           Sukhdev Singh President