CC No.1578.2015

Filed on 01.09.2015

Disposed on:28.09.2017.

BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BANGALORE – 560 027

DATED THIS THE 28^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.1578/2015

PRESENT:

Sri.  H.S.Ramakrishna, B.Sc., LL.B.

                           PRESIDENT

                   Smt.L.Mamatha, B.A., (Law), LL.B.

                          MEMBER

                                          V/S

ORDER

BY SMT.L.MAMATHA, MEMBER

1. This complaint filed by the Complainant on 01.09.2015 u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and praying to pass an order directing the Opposite Parties to return of charges equivalent to the amount paid at the time of purchase of the said product (Rs.13,000/-) and direct the Opposite Parties to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- for causing mental inconvenience, number of working days lost and cost of filing of case.
2. The brief facts of the complaint can be stated as under:-

 In the complaint, the complainant alleges that she purchased a microwave oven (25DGSC1) from IFB Point Vijayanagar, on 12.07.2013.  In the month of May, 2015 the convection and grill malfunctioned.  She subsequently lodged a complaint with the Customer Care on 27.05.2015 (complaint ticket number 15633009).  They sent a technician home after repeated reminders on 30.05.2015 who informed the Complainant that the heater had to be replaced.  Since the product was out of warranty, the Complainant agreed to pay for the same and the technician agreed to return with a replacement in about 5 days time.  But the company failed to replace the defective part.  Repeated calls (to Technicians, Managers, Customer Care, and Service Centre) and e-mails yielded only one response-“the part is not available as yet; we will replace it once we have it”.  Frustrated by the apathy of the Company, the Complainant wrote an email to the headquarters in Goa, on the advice of the Customer Care.  This was first on 05.07.2015.  The Complainant received a reply from IFB Customer Service, promising to look into the matter.  Several email conversations later the Complainant was still on the receiving end no sign of any positive response from the company.  They asked the Complainant to send photographs of the defective heater, the Complainant complied, but to no avail.  Finally, on 27.07.2015, a technician by name Manu visited the Complainant house with an assistant and took the oven to the service centre promising to return it to Complainant in full working condition within 24-48 hours.  Since that fateful day, the Complainant oven has not been returned, the Complainant has repeatedly called the service centre in Prakashnagar, and the one in Whitefield, spoken to innumerable people who identify themselves as managers of various in the company.  This entire episode has caused a lot of inconvenience to the Complainant and her family.  The Complainant has spent her precious time, energy and efforts trying to resolve the issue but in vain.  Hence this complaint. 

3. In response to the notice, the Opposite Party put his appearance through their counsel and filed his version.  In the version pleaded that the Complaint is not maintainable.   It is true that the Complainant purchased microwave but however as can be from the date, the warranty period is over.  As admitted by the Complainant, the Opposite Parties sent its technician immediately within 3 days of filing the complaint to customer care and after inspection of the oven, it was found that the Complainant had not used the oven as per the instructions given in the manual and therefore there was problem in the heater.  The allegations made by the Complainant in Para 2 of her complaint are false and hence denied.  It is denied that the Opposite Parties failed to replace the defective parts.  The Opposite Parties took the microwave oven from the Complainant and repaired the microwave oven by replacing the heater element and the transformer is Rs.1,725/-.  It is submitted that the technician of the Opposite Party thereafter went to the House of the Complainant to deliver the microwave oven which was repaired and to the shock and surprise of the technician who had gone to deliver the oven, the Complainant refused to pay the cost towards repair of the oven and told the Opposite Party to simply handover the microwave oven free of charges.   The Opposite Party is ready to handover the microwave oven to the Complainant before this Hon’ble Forum if the Complainant pays Rs.1,725/- towards the repair charges.  There is no cause of action to file this complaint as such Complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  Hence prays to dismiss the complaint. 
4.  The Complainant Dr.Ambreen Aman filed her affidavit by way of evidence and closed her side.  On behalf of the Opposite Party, the affidavit of one Sri.Prasath has been filed.    Heard, the arguments of the Complainant. 

5.      Now the points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the Complainant has proved the alleged deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties?
2. If so, to what relief the Complainant is entitled?

6.     Our findings on the above points are:-

                POINT (1):- Negative

                POINT (2):- As per the final Order

REASONS

7. POINT NO.1:- As looking into the averments of the Complainant and also the version filed by the Opposite Party, it is not in dispute that the Complainant purchased microwave oven on 12.07.2013 from the Opposite Party.  In the month of May 2015 the convection and grill malfunctioned.  The Complainant lodged a complaint with the Customer Care on 27.05.2015.  Further to substantiate this, the Complainant filed her affidavit. In her sworn testimony, she reiterated the same and produced the Tax Invoice, email correspondences.  By looking into these documents, it is clear that the Complainant purchased (25DGSC1) microwave oven from Opposite Party on 12.07.2013.  In the Month of May 2015 the convection and grill malfunctioned.  The Complainant lodged complaint with Customer Care on 27.05.2015.  The Opposite Party sent a technician on 30.05.2015.  Technician of Opposite Party informed that the heater had to be replaced.  Since the product was out of warranty, the Complainant agreed to pay the repair charges.  But the Opposite Party failed to replace the defective part.  The Opposite Party mailed to Complainant that “the part is not available as yet; we will replace it once we have it”.  The Complainant wrote an email to the headquarters in Goa on the advice of the Customer Care.  The Opposite Party asked to send photographs of the defective heater, the Complainant complied the same.  Finally on 27.07.2015 a technician by name Manu visited to Complainant’s house with an assistant and took the oven to service centre, technician of Opposite Party promised the Complainant that they will return the oven with full working condition within 24-48 hours.  But the Opposite Party still not returned the oven.  Due to this caused a lot of inconvenience to the Complainant and her family.

8. The defence of the Opposite Party is that the Complaint is not maintainable, it is true that the Complainant purchased microwave oven but however as can be seen from the date the warranty period is over.  As admitted by the Complainant Opposite Party sent its technician, within 3 days of filing the complaint.  After inspection of oven it was found that the Complainant had not used the oven as per the instructions given in the manual and therefore there was problem in the heater.  It is denied that the Opposite Party failed to replace the defective parts.  In support of his defence, Sri.Prasath has filed his affidavit and in his sworn testimony, he states that when the technician of Opposite Party went to the house of the Complainant to deliver the microwave oven which was repaired, the Complainant refused to pay repair charges and told Opposite Party to simply handover the microwave oven free of charges.  The Opposite Party is ready to handover microwave oven to the Complainant before this Hon’ble Forum if the Complainant prays Rs.1,725/- towards the repair charges.  There is no cause of action to file this complaint and also there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.

9. On the other hand, the Complainant herself admitted that the microwave oven is in out of warranty period and she is ready to pay the repair charges.  But when the Opposite Party deliver the microwave oven with repair she failed to pay repair charges.

10. With this arguments, nodoubt the Complainant purchased microwave oven (25DGSC1) on 12.07.2013 by paying Rs.13,000/- from the Opposite Party.   In the Month of May 2015 the convection and grill malfunctioned.  The Complainant lodged the complaint, Opposite Party’s technician taken oven to Service Centre.  But the Opposite Party not repaired immediately due to non-availability of the parts of the product.  The Opposite Party mailed same to the Complainant.  This fact is supported by the mail correspondences.  But after getting the parts of the product from market, the Opposite Party replaced the defective parts and when he went to the house of the Complainant to deliver the microwave oven after repair, the Complainant refused to pay the repair charges.  Since product is out of warranty, it is the duty of Complainant to pay the repair charges.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.  It is not proper to accept the argument put forth by the Complainant.  As rightly argued by the learned Counsel for the Opposite Party, even though product is out of warranty Opposite Party repaired the product but Complainant refused to pay repair charges.  This clearly shows that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party.  Hence, this point is held in the Negative. 

11.  POINT NO.2:- In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The Complaint is dismissed.  No cost.   

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties. 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 28^th day of September 2017).

    MEMBER                                                      PRESIDENT

          LIST OF WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS

Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant:

1. Dr.Ambreen Aman, who being Complainant has filed his affidavit.

List of documents filed by the Complainants:

1. Sales Order dt.12.07.2013
2. E-mails dt.05.07.2015,07,07.2015, 14.07.2015, 18,07.2015
3. Letter dt.13.08.2015

Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:

1. Sri.Prasath, who being Senior Service Executive of Opposite Party has filed his affidavit. 

List of documents filed by the Opposite Party:

                              -NIL-

MEMBER                                              PRESIDENT