Order No. 15 dt. 21/06/2018
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased one AC machine from o.p. no.3 on 24.6.16 at a price of Rs.56,189/- and o.p. no.1 is the manufacturer of the said product. At the time of purchasing of the said AC machine the complainant was provided with an installation offer with one year warranty with an assurance of a better product of better after sale service. The complainant after purchasing the same noticed that within two months from the date of purchase the said machine stopped cooling. The complainant and her husband sent several messages to o.ps. through e-mail, but not effective step was taken. The o.p. no.2 replied the said e-mail on 2.7.16 expressing apology for inconvenience cause to the complainant. Thereafter the technician of o.ps. attended the house of the complainant and they looked at the machine and they informed that the said machine was not working because of dirty filter, they took out the filter, cleaned and installed the filter, but the said machine was not cooling. The complainant thereafter made several correspondences with o.ps. but no fruitful result was achieved. Since the complainant suffered mental agony as well as harassment for the negligent and willful act of o.ps. for which the complainant had to file this case. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying or direction upon the o.ps. to refund the amount of Rs.56,189/- as well as compensation and litigation cost.
In spite of receipt of notices the o.p. nos.1 and 2 did not contest this case by filing w/v and as such, the case has proceeded ex parte against them.
The o.p. nos.3 and 4 contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that answering o.p. nos.3 and 4 are the part of the leading modern retail chain of future group of companies and engaged in retailing business by way of upon showcasing of different electronics products in its outlets viz. ‘Ezone’ wherein the customers are allowed to pick and choose any articles from the display racks. The complainant purchased one Hitachi AC machine from o.p. no.3. The answering o.ps. received the complaint on 24.6.16 and o.ps. immediately escalated the issue to o.p. nos.1 and 2 as after sale serviced is the subject matter of manufacturer company. The manufacturer company attended the place of complaint and after checking they informed the complainant that free installation which was done by the engineers of the manufacturer o.p. no.1 the said AC machine was installed wrongly and for which gas has leaked out completely and gas has to be refilled. The o.p. nos.3 and 4 are the retailer and they cannot have any right to interfere into the defect in the AC machine manufactured by o.p. no.1. on the basis of the said fact o.p. nos.3 and 4 prayed for dismissal of the case against them.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant purchased the AC machine from o.p. no.3?
- Whether during the warranty period the said machine started malfunctioning?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant purchased one AC machine from o.p. no.3 on 24.6.16 at a price of Rs.56,189/- and o.p. no.1 is the manufacturer of the said product. At the time of purchasing of the said AC machine the complainant was provided with an installation offer with one year warranty with an assurance of a better product of better after sale service. The complainant after purchasing the same noticed that within two months from the date of purchase the said machine stopped cooling. The complainant and her husband sent several messages to o.ps. through e-mail, but not effective step was taken. The o.p. no.2 replied the said e-mail on 2.7.16 expressing apology for inconvenience cause to the complainant. Thereafter the technician of o.ps. attended the house of the complainant and they looked at the machine and they informed that the said machine was not working because of dirty filter, they took out the filter, cleaned and installed the filter, but the said machine was not cooling. The complainant thereafter made several correspondences with o.ps. but no fruitful result was achieved. Since the complainant suffered mental agony as well as harassment for the negligent and willful act of o.ps. for which the complainant had to file this case. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying or direction upon the o.ps. to refund the amount of Rs.56,189/- as well as compensation and litigation cost.
Though the case is proceeding ex parte, but ld. lawyer for the o.p. nos.1 and 2 made submission to that effect that o.p. nos.1 and 2 have not been properly mentioned in the cause title of the complaint petition. Therefore the complainant cannot seek any relief against o.p. nos.1 and 2 who alleged to be the manufacturer of the said AC machine purchased by the complainant. It was further emphasized that the complainant failed to produce any document showing that the AC machine had manufacturing defect and no expert’s opinion has been filed. on the basis of the said fact o.p. nos.1 and 2 prayed for dismissal of the case against them.
Ld. lawyer for the o.p. nos.3 and 4 argued that answering o.p. nos.3 and 4 are the part of the leading modern retail chain of future group of companies and engaged in retailing business by way of upon showcasing of different electronics products in its outlets viz. ‘Ezone’ wherein the customers are allowed to pick and choose any articles from the display racks. The complainant purchased one Hitachi AC machine from o.p. no.3. The answering o.ps. received the complaint on 24.6.16 and o.ps. immediately escalated the issue to o.p. nos.1 and 2 as after sale serviced is the subject matter of manufacturer company. The manufacturer company attended the place of complaint and after checking they informed the complainant that free installation which was done by the engineers of the manufacturer o.p. no.1 the said AC machine was installed wrongly and for which gas has leaked out completely and gas has to be refilled. The o.p. nos.3 and 4 are the retailer and they cannot have any right to interfere into the defect in the AC machine manufactured by o.p. no.1. on the basis of the said fact o.p. nos.3 and 4 prayed for dismissal of the case against them.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased one AC machine from o.p. no.3 at a price of Rs.56,189/- and it is also undisputed fact that free installation was provided and after the installation of the said machine the complainant noticed that the said machine stopped cooling as well as functioning less than two months from the date of purchase. It has been admitted by o.p. nos.3 and 4 that the installation was made by the persons provided by the manufacturer of the said AC machine. It is also found from the materials on record that after lodging complaint the engineers of o.p. nos.1 and 2 detected that because of wrong installation there was leakage of gas for which the problem of cooling of the said machine had taken place. It appears from the materials on record that after detection of the said defect o.p. nos.1 and 2 did not make any effort to repair the said defect, on the contrary, it appears from the record that o.p. Hitachi company expressed their regret for the inconvenience caused to the complainant. Ld. lawyer for o.p. nos.1 and 2 expressed that the company has not been made a party. If that be the so, how ld. lawyer for o.p. nos.1 and 2 appeared and raised such points that the company has not been made a party in this case. Ld. lawyer for o.p. nos.3 and 4 categorically stated that o.p. nos.1 and 2 are the manufacturer of the said AC machine, therefore it cannot be said that the company has not been made a party in this case. Be that as it may, it appears that during the warranty period the machine did not function properly and the complainant did not get any relief even after purchasing of the AC machine during summer season of that year. The complainant being an educated lady suffering from various ailments faced immense hardship for which she should be compensated as well as o.p. nos.1 and 2 are to be directed to refund the amount paid by her towards the price of the said machine. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.160/2017 is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.p. nos.1 and 2 and dismissed on contest without cost against other o.ps. The o.p. nos.1 and 2 are jointly and/or severally directed to refund the amount of Rs.56,189/- (Rupees fifty six thousand one hundred eighty nine) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
The complainant is also directed to return the AC machine in question to o.p. nos.1 and 2 after realization of the awarded sum.
