Haryana

Rohtak

CC/23/327

Divyam Panghal - Complainant(s)

Versus

IFB Industries Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Prince Malik

13 Oct 2023

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rohtak.
Haryana.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/23/327
( Date of Filing : 14 Jun 2023 )
 
1. Divyam Panghal
S/o Rajesh Kumar Panghal, R/o Opp. Canara Bank, VPO Maina, Rohtak.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. IFB Industries Limited,
2, Plot No. IND-5, Sector-1, East Kolkata, Kolkata-700107 through its Chairman/ MD.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Nagender Singh Kadian PRESIDENT
  Mrs. Tripti Pannu MEMBER
  Sh. Vijender Singh MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 13 Oct 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                             Complaint No. : 327

                                                                             Instituted on     : 14.06.2023

                                                                             Decided on       : 13.10.2023

 

Divyam Panghal age 28 years, s/o Rajesh Kumar Panghal R/o Opp. Canara Bank, VPO Maina, Rohtak.

                                                                             .......................Complainant.

 

                                                Vs.

 

IFB Industries Limited, 2, Plot No. IND-5, Sector-1, East Kolkata, Kolkata-700107 through its Chairman/MD

                                                                                                                                                                                                ………….Opposite party.

 

          COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.

 

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

                  

Present:       Sh.Prince Malik, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Opposite party No. 1 and 2 already exparte.

                              

                                                ORDER

 

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

 

1.                Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that on 17.05.2021 he purchased two 1.5 Ton 5 star split dual inverter IFB ACs  for his home from Flipkart and paid a consideration of Rs.65886/-(Rs,32943/- for each unit)  and Rs.4400/- to the officials  of IFB company for installation and stands of A.Cs. The complainant also paid Rs.2120/-(Rs.1060.82/- each) for extended warranty which would cover free exchange/repair of the ACs against any fault. After the purchase of said ACs, the complainant started using the units as per guidelines and instructions for use by manufacturer company and the same did not even work properly for one day and complainant began facing problems in the cooling of the ACs.  The ACs stopped cooling and sometimes even started shutting down on their own. The electronic part of the appliances stopped responding every now and then and due to the said defect, the complainant was unable to use the ACs effectively in any manner and had to suffer a lot during severe summers.  The complainant immediately  contacted the opposite party for the said issues but every time whenever he called up the customer care or wrote mails/whatsapp complaints, it took several attempts for him to lodge basic complaint. The complainant had made more than 10 requests for these units but even after lodging such complaints, there was no concrete solution provided by the opposite party. There has been a manufacturing defect in the cooling system of both the ACs and the technicians did not replace/repair these units due to which complainant has suffered great problems and harassment. The customer support executives were reached by the complainant on several occasions but each time the engineers failed to get the product working.  The complainant was given various service complaint nos. i.e. 1011235338, WA202258367, WA202258557, 1011580510 and 1011580535 etc. Some of the complaints were closed by the technicians on the ground that the service centre contract of OP company in Rohtak has now been given to some other agency and hence, they are not going to repair any IFB products from now. The opposite party is bound to provide the services to its customers but the same were not provided by the opposite party. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay total Rs.72406/-including the invoice amount, installation charges and AMC warranty charges alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of purchase and also to pay R.100000/- as compensation on account  of deficiency in service and Rs.100000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant .  2.                    After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party through registered post. As per track report submitted by the counsel for the complainant, delivery of the item was confirmed. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party. As such, opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 01.08.2023 of this Commission.

3.                Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C17 and closed his evidence on dated 05.09.2023.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                In the present case it is not disputed that as per bills Ex.C2 & Ex.C5 respectively, complainant had purchased two 5 star split dual inverter A.Cs from the opposite party. He has also purchased extended warranty for the said ACs vide Ex.C3 & Ex.C6 respectively.  As per the complainant the said ACs were defective from the very beginning and he made so many complaints with the opposite party but the defect of the ACs could not be removed by the opposite party despite his repeated complaints and requests. To prove the same, he has placed on record copy of complaints Ex.C8 to Ex.C11, Call history Ex.C12, copy of SMS Ex.C13 & Ex.C14 and copies of email Ex.C15 to Ex.C17. As per emails Ex.C15 to Ex.C17 it is clear that the opposite party had registered the complaints with reference no. 1011235338 dated 22.04.2023, 1011580510 dated 10.06.2023, & 1011580535 dated 10.06.2023 respectively and as per email Ex.C17 it is submitted that the product is out of warranty and the service will be made on chargeable basis. We have also perused the warranty contract Ex.C4, as per which the AMC Start date is 19.05.2022 and AMC expiry date is 18.05.2026. Meaning thereby the alleged ACs became defective within warranty period.  We have also perused the terms and conditions of the alleged warranty contract which are as under:-

No.12. “ The company or the service franchisee of the service agent shall provide two mandatory free services per annum during the period of the contract, in case of air conditioner the company or the service agent shall provide three numbers of services(two dry and one wet), which shall be provided at an interval of four months during the period of contract. In case of Super Warranty of AC. Clause 24 of this document will be applicable.”

 

No. 17. “Comprehensive AMC and Extended Warranty includes labour and all components(not accessories/ Consumables). However, the following components are excluded

a. Cabinets

b. Aesthic materials

c. Rubber material/ Plastic pipes

d. In case of AMC for air-conditioner machines the following items will not be covered - Remote Control, Voltage Stabilizer, Evaporator and Condenser Coils Sheet Metal & Plastic Parts and any damages due to rodents/insects.”

 

No.24. “Super warranty contract is exclusively applicable for air-conditioner machines and does not include visit charges or the calls attended by the technicians. During this super warranty period, functional parts other than sheet metal and plastic parts shall be covered for replacement/ repairs. Super warranty is applicable and remain valid provided customer avails two annual preventive maintenance service every year by logging call with IFB contact center from 2nd year till the 5th year (on chargeable basis as prevalent at the time of call logging, which will be carried out by an authorized service franchise of IFB.”

 

                   Hence as per terms and conditions of the warranty, the alleged A.Cs were covered under warranty but despite the same, it could not be repaired or replaced by the opposite party within warranty period. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. It is also on record that opposite party did not appear before this Commission which shows that it has nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite party stands proved. Hence the opposite party is liable to replace the A.Cs in question and also to compensate the complainant.

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to replace both the A.Cs in question with brand new ACs of same model and also to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed to hand over the A.Cs in question to the opposite party at the time of replacement by the opposite party. It is made clear that opposite party shall install the new A.Cs at its own cost and will not charge any installation charges from the complainant at the time of installation of the same.

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

13.10.2023

 

                                                          ........................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

 

                                                         

                                                              ………………………………..

                                                                        Tripti Pannu, Member.

 

                  

                                                                        ………………………………..

                                                                        Vijender Singh, Member.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Nagender Singh Kadian]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Mrs. Tripti Pannu]
MEMBER
 
 
[ Sh. Vijender Singh]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.