BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 17/03/2012

Date of Order : 30/04/2012

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 171/2012

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :-

The complainant purchased a washing machine from Altima Home Appliances on 04-02-2009 at a price of Rs. 17,800/-, which was manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party. Two years warranty has been provided by the 2^nd opposite party. During the warranty period, the machine got damaged more than 10 times. The complainant had to replace the timer of the machine twice. After the warranty period, the timer of the machine was again replaced by spending Rs. 2,200/-. The warranty was extended at the request of the complainant for the period from 24-05-2011. During the extended warranty period, the machine became defunct on 14-02-2012. They took the machine on 16-02-2012. Time and again, the complainant requested the 1^st opposite party to return the machine after its repairs. The complainant suspects that the product is a sub-standard one which suffers from various defects. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties either to replace the same with a new one or to repair the same or to get the price of the machine refunded together with compensation and costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.

2. The service of notice of the 1^st opposite party has not been completed. Though the 2^nd opposite party accepted the notice from this Forum, they remained absent during the proceedings. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A6 were marked on his side. Heard the complainant who appeared in person.

3. The points that came up for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the machine repaired or to get the machine replaced with a new one or to get refund of the price?

2. Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation and costs of the proceedings to the complainant?

4. Point Nos. i. & ii. :- Ext. A1 retail invoice goes to show that the complainant purchased a washing machine from Altima Home Appliances on 04-02-2009. The 2^nd opposite party is the manufacturer of the machine who offered 2 years warranty for the machine from 04-02-2009 evidenced by Ext. A2 warranty card. Ext. A3 invoice cum receipt would show that the complainant had to expend Rs. 1,050/- to rectify the defect of the machine on 08-02-2009. Though, the complainant contended that he had availed additional warranty from the opposite parties for a period from 24-05-2011 to 24-05-2012, nothing is on record to substantiate the same. According to the complainant, time and again, he had to approach the opposite parties to rectify the defects of the machine. Finally, the 1^st opposite party took the machine on 16-02-2012, and thereafter, there was no response on the part of the opposite parties. There is no reason to disbelieve the case of the complainant especially on account of the absence of the 2^nd opposite party in this Forum. The 2^nd opposite party is liable to rectify the defects of the machine within the warranty period and free of cost and thereafter on payment basis for the same in which they have failed. By the time, the complainant has had to suffer lot of mental agony and inconveniences due to the deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party which calls for compensation. We fix it at Rs. 5,000/-.

5. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct as follows :

1. The 2^nd opposite party shall take immediate steps to rectify the defects of the machine with fresh warranty as envisaged which is in possession of the 1^st opposite party, failing which the 2^nd opposite party shall replace the machine with a new one of the same price according to the option of the complainant.

2. The 2^nd opposite party shall pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the reasons stated above, if the 2^nd opposite party complies with the 2^nd limb of the above order, they need not pay the compensation to the complainant.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30^th day of April 2012.

Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil

=========