Delhi

StateCommission

A/11/345

FABER HEATHCRAFT INDUSTRIES LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

K.K. NARARNI - Opp.Party(s)

16 Jul 2015

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                   Date of Decision: 16.07.2015

First Appeal No. 345/2011

(Arising out of the order dated 08.06.2011 passed in complaint case No. 312/2010 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (East) Convenient Shopping Centre, Saini Enclave, New Delhi-110092)

In the matter of:

Faber Heatkraft Industries Ltd.

Reg. Office: Franke Faber India Limited

37/1 Kondhwa Pisoli Road, Pisoli

Pune-411060, India

 

Branch Office:

108, Ist Floor, Deepsiksha Building

Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008                                 Appellant

 

Versus

 

Dr. K.K.Narani

R/o A-28, Preet Vihar

Delhi-110092                                                                 Respondent

                                                                  

CORAM

 

SH N P KAUSHIK                              -                       Member (Judicial)

SH. S.C. JAIN                                    -                       Member

 

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

 

N P KAUSHIK – MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGMENT

1.      The appellant has impugned the orders dt. 08.06.2011 passed by the Ld. District Forum (East) Saini Enclave, Delhi – 110092.  Vide impugned orders Ld. District Forum directed the OP-2 to pay an amount of Rs. 10,990/- towards the costs of Chimney to the complainant. Besides this compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- for sheer suffering and mental agony to the complainant was also awarded.
2.      Facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant purchased a Chimney called Faber Heatkraft for his kitchen from OP-1 on 06.09.2009.  The same was installed after charging an amount of Rs. 10,990/- by the representative of the OP on 23.09.2009.  OP had provided life time warranty to the complainant which was issued by the OP-2.  Grievance of the complainant was that on 08.03.2010 flames and smoke was noticed in the Chimney and the fire had broken out as the plastic material used in the lining in the Chimney was highly inflammable.  On the call of the complainant, a representative of the OP visited the house of the complainant on 10.03.2010.  Grievance of the complainant is that he was not satisfied with the explanation given by the representative of the OP.  Complainant thereafter wrote a letter to the OP and sent an e-mail.
3.      It is not the case of the complainant that representative of the OP carried out repairs. He had simply given an explanation to the cause of fire when he told the complainant that the fire took place due to the deposit of oil vapours inside the chimney.  It is also not the case of the complainant that the Chimney in question caught fire at any point of time thereafter.  Admittedly the Chimney is in possession of the complainant.  Ld. Trial Forum fell in grave error in not taking into account the salvage of the chimney.  The complainant suffered inconvenience due to smoke and flames observed by him in the Chimney on 08.03.2010.  The Chimney did not catch fire after 08.03.2010.  It goes to show that the complainant started observing the precautions explained to him in the brochure of the Chimney and the instructions given by the representative of the OP on his visit to the kitchen on 10.03.2010.  Be that as it may, there was one and the only one episode of smoke or flames observed in the chimney.  In the circumstances, it would be harsh to the OP in awarding the entire costs of the Chimney in favour of the complainant.  Orders of the Ld. District Forum are hence modified as under:-

“OP-2 shall pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 25,000/- towards inconvenience, harassment and mental agony suffered by him”.

 

The abovesaid orders shall be complied with by the OP-2 within a period of sixty days from today failing which interest @ 18% p.a. shall be chargeable on the said amount.

4.         Copy of the orders be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules and thereafter the file be consigned to Records.
5.         FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant be released as per rules.

(N P Kaushik)

Member (Judicial)