DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE

PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB    : PRESIDENT

Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) :  MEMBER

 Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER

Friday, the 29^th  day of November 2024

CC No. 50/2021

Complainant

                        Suranth.T,

Kakkattumeethal (HO),

                        Peruvattoor,

Koyilandy, Kozhikode – 673 620.

(By Adv. Sri. Athira.C)

Opposite Parties

1.              Kannankandy Sales Corporation,

Mavoor road, Arayidathupalam,

Kozhikode – 673 004.

2.              L.G. India Pvt Ltd,

Door No. 24/1598/B first floor,

K.P.M Arcade,

Chevarambalam (PO),

Kudilthodi juctiion,

Thondayad, Malaparamaba by pass,

Calicut, Kerala – 673 017.

(OP1 by Adv. Sri. Sujatha. K.N and Adv. Sri. Pavithran.K)

                                                                                ORDER

By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN  – PRESIDENT

            This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  

2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:

On 21/08/2015 the complainant purchased a washing machine of LG Company from the shop of the 1^st opposite party. But within one year of the purchase, it ceased to working due to failure of the drum. He contacted the LG service centre and the defect was rectified.

3. The warranty period was 2 years. Within the warranty period, the same problem repeated along with shock in the touch panel. On contacting the LG service centre, the technicians came and inspected the washing machine and stated that the parts needed replacement and that the same would be done within 10 days.
4. Though this assurance was given on 16/08/2020 there was no response even after 25 days. When contacted the service centre, he was informed that the spare parts were not available due to Covid-19 pandemic and that they would fix it within a few days.   Then he registered a complaint with the first opposite party. Thereafter, the officials of the LG company had assured that they were ready to supply a new washing machine or refund the price as spare parts were not available. But nothing was done thereafter inspite of repeated requests. Hence the complaint for refund of the purchase price along with compensation. Cost of the litigation is also claimed.
5. The 1^st opposite party has filed written version wherein they have denied all the allegations and claims made against them in the complaint. It is admitted in the version that on 21/08/2018 the complainant had purchased an LG washing machine from their shop. Within one year of the purchase, the drum became defective and the LG service centre technician attended the complaint.   Later the same problem repeated with shock in the touch panel and the service centre had agreed to replace the parts. It is the duty of the 2^nd opposite party to attend the repairs. It is true that there was some delay in getting the spare parts due to Covid-19 pandemic and the lockdown. Later the technician was ready to replace the parts, but the complainant was not ready for the same. He insisted that the entire price should be refunded or the machine should be replaced with a new one. The repairs and replacement are to be decided by the company and the first opposite party has no role in the matter. The first opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant. If at all it is found that the complainant is entitled to get any compensation, the same has to be paid by the 2^nd opposite party manufacturer.
6. The 2^nd opposite party filed written version on 19/11/2022. The notice issued from this Commission was served on the 2^nd opposite party on 25/08/2021. The version was not filed within the statutory period and hence it was not accepted.  However, the second opposite party was permitted to participate in the proceedings and cross examine the witness.
7. The points that arise for determination in this complaint are;

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite  parties, as alleged?
2. Reliefs and costs.

8. Evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts A1 to A3 on the side of the complainant.  PW1 was cross examined by both the opposite parties. No evidence was adduced by the opposite parties.  
9. Heard both sides.  The complainant has filed argument note.
10. Point No 1 : The complainant is alleging deficiency of service on the part of the    opposite parties. The 2^nd opposite party is the manufacturer of LG washing machine and the 1^st opposite party is the dealer. The complainant purchased an LG W MT7281 washing machine from the first opposite party on 20/08/2018 paying Rs. 16,690/-. It became defective during the warranty period. The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite parties have failed to attend the repairs/service despite repeated requests and though the manufacturer had assured to replace it with a new one or refund the price, that was also not done.
11. In order to substantiate his case, the complainant got himself examined as PW1, who has filed proof affidavit and deposed in terms of the averments in the complainant and in support of the claim. Ext A1 is the tax invoice dated 20/08/2018,   Ext A2 is the copy of the email dated 14/02/2021 and Ext A3 is the screenshot of the watsapp message.
12. Going by the pleadings and evidence, it can be seen that there is no dispute that the washing machine purchased by the complainant ceased working during the warranty period and the complaint was duly reported to the opposite parties and there was neglect on the part of the opposite parties to address the concerns of the complainant over the product. PW1 has categorically asserted that there was gross neglect on the part of the opposite parties to attend the complaint by replacing the parts of the machine. There is no reason to disbelieve PW1.  The opposite parties did not lead any evidence to rebut the evidence adduced by the complainant. No contra evidence is there.
13. The case tried to be setup by the opposite parties is that there was shortage of spare parts during Covid-19 pandemic period. It is the duty of the opposite parties especially the manufacturer to ensure the supply of the spare parts and to attend the repairs promptly as and when complaints are reported. There was delay and latches in this regard and as far as the complainant is concerned, he was not able to use the washing machine for a long period and was compelled to purchase a new one and the washing machine in question has now become a worthless product for him. There is gross deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.   The opposite parties are bound to refund the price of the product to the complainant. Undoubtedly, the latches and negligence on the part of the opposite parties have caused intense mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant, for which, he is entitled to be compensated adequately. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 10,000/- will be reasonable compensation in this case. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 5,000/- as cost of the proceedings. The opposite parties are  jointly and severally liable. Point found accordingly.   
14. Point No. 2:- In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows;
    1. CC. 50/2021 is allowed in part.
    2. The opposite parties are hereby directed to refund the price of the washing machine amounting to of Rs. 16,690/- (Rupees sixteen thousand six hundred and ninety only) to the complainant. On such payment, the opposite parties can take possession of the washing machine from the complainant.
    3. The opposite parties are directed to pay sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience suffered.
    4. The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
    5. The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs. 16,690/- shall carry an interest of 9% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
    6. The liability of the opposite parties shall be joint and several.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in open Commission,  this the  29^th  day of November, 2024.

Date of Filing: 25.02.2021

     Sd/-                                                            Sd/-                                                              Sd/- 

PRESIDENT                                              MEMBER                                                    MEMBER                                

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant :

Ext A1 - Tax invoice dated 20/08/2018. 

Ext A2 - Copy of the email dated 14/02/2021.

Ext A3 - Screenshot of the watsapp message.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party

Nil

Witnesses for the Complainant

PW1  -  Suranth.T    (Complainant).

Witnesses for the opposite party

NIL                         

     Sd/-                                                            Sd/-                                                              Sd/- 

PRESIDENT                                              MEMBER                                                    MEMBER                                

                                                                                    True Copy,      

                                                                                                          Sd/-  

                                                                                            Assistant Registrar.