Haryana

Karnal

CC/7/2017

Surender - Complainant(s)

Versus

Hitachi India Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Balbir Singh Chauhan

21 Mar 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.07 of 2017

                                                         Date of instt. 03.01.2017

                                                         Date of decision:21.03.2018

 

Surender son of Shri Baljit, resident of village Kharkali, Tehsil and District Karnal.

                                                                                                                        …….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

 

1.Hitachi India Pvt.Ltd. Delhi, unit 304-306, 3^rd floor, ABW Elegance Tower, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi 110025.

2. Voltas Service Center, M.L. Enterprises, Model Town, near Water Tank, Karnal.

3. Doda Comforts, 417, Ashoka Colony, Opp. Police Lines, Karnal authorized signatory.

             …..Opposite Parties.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before   Sh. Jagmal Singh……President.

              Ms. Veena Rani……..Member

              Sh. Anil Sharma……….Member.

               

 

 Present  Shri B.S. Chauhan Advocate for complainant.

               Opposite parties exparte.

               

ORDER:                    

 

                This complaint has been filed by the complainants u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, on the averments that complainant had purchased one Hitachi 1.5 ton Split Air Conditioner alongwith stabilizer for an amount of Rs.44,150/-, vide invoice/bill no.11114 dated 22.04.2015 from OP no.3 with the warranty of the complete air conditioner for one year and warranty of compressor for five years. OP no.1 is the registered company which deals in electronics goods and having authorized dealer in all over India for selling their products. OP no.2 is the authorized service centre of OP no.1 and OP no.3 is the authorized distributor of OP no.1. Since the day of purchase of the abovesaid air conditioner, it was not working properly as the cooling of the air conditioner was not so good and the complaint in that regard was made by the complainant so many times, then the official of OPs visited at the house of the complainant and rectified the problem of the air conditioner. It is further alleged that inspite of the rectification of the defect, the air conditioner was not working properly. Complainant visited the OP no.2 so many times and requested for rectification of the defect of the AC in question but OPs did not pay any heed to his request. In order to rectify the defect, the complainant made so many complaints to the OPs including complaint no.75050703042 dated 7.5.2015, no.15082503241 dated 25.08.2015,  no.15083002346 dated 30.08.2015, no.16032202286 dated 22.3.2016 no.16040808306 dated 8.4.2016, no.16041809964 dated 18.4.2016,  no.160526007899 dated 26.05.2016, no.16060207518 dated 20.06.2016 and lastly on 30.6.2016 complaint no.16063007185. The complainant made complaint to the service centre of OP, upon which the service centre taken the aforesaid air condition to rectify the defect but after checking the mechanic of OP no.2 told that the said problem of the air conditioner could not be rectified as the same is having manufacturing problem and as such since that day, the said air conditioner is lying with OP no.2.  Thereafter, complainant requested the OPs several time for replacement of the defective AC or to refund the cost of the AC but OPs always postponed the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly refused to replace the same and to repay the total amount of AC to the complainant. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who did not appear and proceeded against exparte by the order of this Forum dated 1.9.2017 and 17.2.2017 respectively.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence on 6.3.2018.

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

5.             From the pleadings and evidence of the case, it is clear that the complainant had purchased one Hitachi 1.5 tone Split AC alongwith stabilizer from OP no.3 for Rs.44,150/-. It is alleged by the complainant that since the day of purchase the said AC was not working properly and in that regard complainant made many complaints to the OPs for resolving the problem of the AC. Despite best efforts made by the mechanic of the OPs the defect could not removed and mechanic of the OPs also told that there was manufacturing defect in the AC. From the complaint it is clear that the complainant has made various complaints but inspite of that the AC of the complainant has not been working properly. In support of his version complainant placed on file his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9. On the other hand, the OPs did not appear and opted to be proceeded against exparte. Therefore, the evidence of the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the complainant. So, we are of the considered view that the AC of the complainant is defective and the OPs have not resolved the defect of the AC in question. Hence the OPs are deficient.

6.             Thus, as sequel to abovesaid discussions, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to replace the AC in question with new one of the same make and model as purchased by the complainant. However, it is hereby made clear that if the AC of the same make and model not is not available with the OPs then the complainant is entitled for the refund of the Rs.38,650/-the value of the AC. We further direct the OPs to pay Rs.2200/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied with within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:21.03.2018

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

 

            (Veena Rani)       (Anil Sharma)

                Member                Member