Haryana

Ambala

CC/186/2013

RAMESH CHANDER SHARMA S/O LT. SH SHANKAR DASS SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

IKON ELECTRONICS - Opp.Party(s)

R.S TAYAL

18 Jul 2017

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 186 of 2013

                                                          Date of Institution         : 24.07.2013

                                                          Date of decision            : 18.07.2017

 

          Ramesh Chander Sharma S/o Lt. Sh. Shankar Dass Sharma R/o H.No.102,      Ekta Vihar, Ambala Cantt.  

……. Complainant.

1.       IKon Electronics SCO 19-20, Gulati Market, Jagadhri Road, Near K.D.   Hospital, Ambala Cantt. through Incharge.

2.       Nine Star Company Hitachi and Whirl Pool Service Centre, Shop No.111,        old Bus Stand, Railway Road, Ambala Chant. Through Incharge.

3.       Hitachi Home and Life Solution India Ltd. Registered Office 9^th Floor,      Abhijeet, Mithakhali Six Roads, Ahemdabad-380006 Gujrat India.

 

….…. Respondents.

 

 

BEFORE:   SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER         

                   MS. ANAMKIA SHARMA, MEMBER             

 

Present:       Sh. Vishal Mittal, counsel for complainant.  

                   OPs No.1 and 2 already exparte v.o.d. 12.05.2017.

                   OP No.3 already exparte v.o.d. 30.01.2014.

                  

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant had purchased a Hitachi Window A.C. 1.5 Ton capacity from OP No.1 vide invoice No.141 dated 25.07.2012 for Rs.31,250/- and initially paid Rs.10,000/-  and the remaining balance was got paid by the complainant through Ambala Cantt office of Bajaj finance ltd. 4^th Floor Servey #208/I-B, Viman Nagar, Pune 411014 and paid the entire amount even to Bajaj finance ltd. and got issued a clearance certificate dated 18.07.2013 within warranty of one year for the manufacturing defect and the compressor of the AC is having a warranty of sixty months from the date of invoice. Further submitted that OP No.1 did not deliver accessories of AC nor gave its remote, the technician who was sent to fix the unit was not skilled person and did not do the job properly and the remote was supplied after may months on account of our repeated requested by the dealer. The complainant further submitted that parts of the AC namely PCB plate, motor, candenser were replaced number of times by OP No.2 and the AC remained under repair from time to time and finally broke down in May 2013. The AC was delivered at the service centre on 28^th May 2013 and remained there for repair for about one month and could be collected on complainants costs on 25^th June, 2013 and the AC was got reinstall on 27^th June 2013 and finally broke down after two days and is non functional till date. Further submitted that the dealer, Service centre officials and registered office i.e. OP No.3 were requested to get the defects in AC rectify or replace the same by a new AC or refund the amount of purchase as the AC is under warranty period. Further submitted that OPs No.1 to 3 miserably failed to discharge their obligations in term of the warranty given to the complainant at the time of the purchase of the said Air Conditioner and period given in the notice dated 4^th July 2013 has expired on 18^th July 2013. In this way, the complainant is made to suffer helplessly and endlessly for no fault of his and has been subject to problems, discomfort, tension and harassment on account of in action on the part of OPs No. 1 to 3. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written statement submitting that the present complaint is not at all maintainable in the present form and the filing of the same is misuse of process of law, as the A.C. in question was having no manufacturing defect at all nor there was any problem, but inspite of that the complainant is bent upon harassing the OPs and after such a belated stage, the complainant has filed the present complaint just to get the new A.C and the complainant be put to strict proof to substantiate the contents of the complaint. So, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the present complaint

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X along with documents as annexure C-1 to C-8 and close his evidence. On the other hand, OPs did not bothered with the present case after filing of reply and OPs No.1 and 2 was proceeded against exparte v.o.d. 12.05.2017 and OP No.3 was proceeded against  exparte v.o.d. 30.01.2014.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the case file. The grievance of complainant is that the OPs had not delivered complete accessories of the AC and even the Technician was not a skilled person therefore, the AC could not work properly during the warranty period. However, the parts of the AC namely PCB plate, motor, condenser were replaced number of times by OP No.2 but despite that his grievance could not be redressed  forcing him to approach this Forum.

5.                It is worthwhile to mention here that if any consumer when he buys a new product he is under the impression that the same is bound to be mechanically perfect or that a brand new product would be defect free.  A new product could be defected as well.  It could be that some errors are insignificant but there may be many others which substantially impair use of the product.   If the product is defective a consumer has a right to seek its replacement or refund of the price. Though the burden to prove the defect is on the consumer, yet it must be understood that consumer is not bound to pinpoint the precise nature of defects or its cause or source.  The warranty which is given for a product is a warranty for whole of the product and when it is found that the product does not perform properly the warranty would be taken to have been breached even if no individual part could be identified as defective.  A  Consumer Forum has however, to take into consideration consumer state of mind as well.  After all he had invested in the new product to buy peace of mind hoping that the same is dependable and trouble free.  The pleadings and contentions put forth by the complainant remained unrebutted as the Ops did not join the proceedings of the case after filing of reply to counter the version of the complainant and opted to remain exparte.   Thus we have no other option except to believe the version of the complainant.

5.                In view of above discussion, the present complaint is hereby allowed with costs and Ops are directed to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

(i)      To replace the A.C in question with a new one of the same model. If the same model is not available then to refund the cost of A.C. to the tune of Rs.31,250/- as per Annexure C-1 along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till its realization.

 (ii)    Also to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- on account of mental harassment & agony alongwith cost of litigation.

                   Copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on : 18.07.2017                                        Sd/-

                                                                              (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                       President

 

                 Sd/-

     (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                       Member

 

                                                                                   Sd/-

            (ANAMIKA GUPTA)

                                                                                          Member