Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Room No. 208 2nd Floor, District Administrative Complex, Tarn Taran
Consumer Complaint No : 01 of 2019
Date of Institution : 01.01.2019
Date of Decision : 09.05.2019
Dharamvir Khanna aged 65 years son of Sh. Valaytee Ram Khanna, resident of H.No. 1588/14, Jain Mohalla Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran. Adhar Card No. 343996557286. …..Complainant
Versus
- L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Head Office Plot No. 51, Surjpur Kasna road, Greator Noida 201310 through its M.D,
- National TV Centre, through its Authorized Dealer, Main Bazar, Near Kiran Cinema, Patti District Tarn Taran through its Proprietor. …Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act .
Quorum: Sh. Charanjit Singh, President
Smt. Jaswinder Kaur, Member
Sh. Jatinder Singh Pannu, Member
For Complainant Sh. H.S. Sandhu Advocate.
For Opposite Party Exparte.
ORDERS:
Charanjit Singh, President;
1 The complainant Dharamvir Khanna has filed the present complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called as 'the Act') against L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Head Office Plot No. 51, Surjpur Kasna road, Greator Noida 201310 through its M.D and another (Opposite parties) on the allegations of deficiency in service and negligence in service on the part of the opposite parties with further prayer to direct the opposite parties to replace the defective Refrigerator in question with the new one of the same Model alongwith warranty and guarantee for 10 years or return the purchase price of Rs. 23,000/- alongwith Rs. 5000/- as interest on it till date. The complainant has also prayed Rs. 20,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.
2 The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased one L.G. Refrigerator having Model No. 281BRGX vide receipt No. 1805 dated 5.6.2018 by paying Rs. 23,000/- to the opposite party No. 2 and at the time of selling this refrigerator to the complainant, the opposite party No. 2 gave warranty of replacement of the product of 10 years on it and also told the complainant that he alongwith the opposite party No.1 is fully responsible for any defect or complaint in the product sold by them and such, the complainant can them in such like circumstances. From the first day of installing the above mentioned refrigerator at the house of the complainant, the product did not give output as required by it, as it was neither able to refrigerate the goods kept in it nor it could freeze the water to make it ice, so the complainant approached the opposite party No. 2 regarding it and the opposite party No. 2 told the complainant to lodge an online complaint to opposite party No. 1 and the technicians of the opposite party No. 1 will visit the house of the complainant and solve the problems experienced by him regarding the refrigerator. The complainant lodged several online complaints and after these several complaints, the technician of the opposite party No. 1 visited the house of the complainant and told him to transport the refrigerator to Amritsar at his own costs and only then he will resolve the defect in it. The complainant told the technicians of the opposite party No. 1 that he cannot do so and as such again approached the opposite party No. 2 and told him about the version given by the opposite party No. 1’s technician and also told him to replace the unit as it is still under warranty of replacement but nothing was done by the opposite party No. 2 regarding it rather, he flatly refused to do so and also told the complainant that only the opposite party No. 1 can address the grievances of the complainant and also supplied the phone Number on which an online complaint can be lodged regarding the products of the opposite party No. 1. The complainant lodged on line complaint as told by the opposite party No. 2 four times and all the time a new complaint was given by the opposite party No. 1 but nothing was one to remove the defect in the refrigerator. The defect in the refrigerator was a manufacturing defect and as such, the complainant did not take the assistance of any of the local technician and only approached the opposite parties but nothing was done by them till date. Feeling dissatisfied by the act and conduct of the opposite parties, the complainant perforce has filed this complaint against the opposite parties. Alongwith the complaint the complainant has placed on record his affidavit Ex. C-1, Self attested copy of sale voucher/ purchase Receipt Ex. C-2, self attested copy of complaint Number Ex. C-3.
3 Notice of this complaint was sent to the opposite parties but no one appeared on behalf of opposite parties and consequently, the opposite parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.2.2019 of this Forum.
4 We have heard the Ld. counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the evidence and documents on the file.
5 The complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. C-1 and in his affidavit he pleaded that he purchased one L.G. Refrigerator having Model No. 281BRGX vide receipt No. 1805 dated 5.6.2018 by paying Rs.23,000/- to the opposite party No. 2 vide Ex. C-2 and at the time of selling this refrigerator to the complainant, the opposite party No. 2 gave warranty of replacement of the product of 10 years on it and also told the complainant that he alongwith the opposite party No.1 is fully responsible for any defect or complaint in the product sold by them and such, the complainant can them in such like circumstances. From the first day of installing the above mentioned refrigerator at the house of the complainant, the product did not give output as required by it, as it was neither to refrigerate the good kept in it nor it could freeze the water to make it ice, so the complainant approached the opposite party No. 2 regarding it and the opposite party No. 2 told the complainant to lodge an online complaint to opposite party No. 1 and the technicians of the opposite party No. 1 will visit the house of the complainant and solve the problems experienced by him regarding the refrigerator. The complainant lodged several online complaints and after these several complaints, the technician of the opposite party No. 1 visited the house of the complainant and told him to transport the refrigerator to Amritsar at his own costs and only then he will solve the defect in it. The complainant told the technicians of the opposite party No. 1 that he cannot do so and as such again approached the opposite party No. 2 and told him about the version given by the opposite party No. 1’s technician and also told him to replace the unit as it is still under warranty of replacement but nothing was done by the opposite party No. 2 regarding it rather, he flatly refused to do so and also told the complainant that only the opposite party No. 1 can address the grievances of the complainant and also supplied the phone Number on which an online complaint can be lodged regarding the products of the opposite party No. 1. The complainant lodged on line complaint as told by the opposite party No. 2 four times and all these times a new complaint was given by the opposite party No. 1 but nothing was one to remove the defect in the refrigerator. The complaints made by the complainant is Ex. C-3. He further contended that the defect in the refrigerator was a manufacturing defect and as such, the complainant did not take the assistance of any of the local technician and only approached the opposite parties but nothing was done by them till date and prayed
6 The evidence led by the complainant on the file goes unchallenged and unrebutted as Opposite Party is proceeded against exparte in the present complaint and there is no reason on the file as to why the evidence produced by the complainant be not believed. Otherwise also, due notice was issued to the Opposite Parties and opposite parties did not appear in this Forum in order to contest the complaint which shows that the Opposite Parties have nothing to say upon the allegations leveled against it by the complainant. As such, the complainant is entitled to the relief claimed in the complaint and it stands established on record that the complainant made many complaints to the opposite parties but the opposite party did not care to resolve the matter, not only committed deficiency in service, but also indulged in an unfair trade practice.
7 The complainant has produced on record self attested copy of sale voucher/ purchase receipt Ex. C-1 which shows the purchase of Refrigerator as 5.6.2018 and shows warranty of 1+9 years. The complainant has also produced on record Ex. C-3 vide which the complainant made complaint on 30.8.2018, 7.9.2018, 7.9.2018, 13.9.2018 and 12.10.2018 i.e. just after two or three months from the date of purchasing the product. The perusal of record shows that the problems in the refrigerator in question is occurred within warranty period and if any defect occurred during the warranty period the same is to be replaced. In this regard, Hon’ble Delhi State Commission, New Delhi in case titled as Jugnu Dhillon Vs. Reliance Digital Retail Limited 11(2014) CPJ page 17 has held that
“failure of compressor within 2-3 months of its purchase itself amounts to manufacturing defects- when any company stopped manufacturing particular model under these circumstances only way left is to refund of money alongwith interest- Product found to be defective at the very outset- It is always better to order for refund of amount.”
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled Hindustan Motors Limited and Anr. Vs. N.Shiva Kumar and Anr. (2000) 10 Supreme Court Cases, 654 has held that
“when any company had stopped manufacturing the particular model, under those circumstances, there is no other way except to refund of money alongwith interest, compensation and cost.”
In the instant case, the car in question started giving troubles within warranty period. In this regard, Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case Shirish Vs. C.S.Rahalkar (Dr) in 2010(3) CLT page 209 has held that
“the respondent had paid Rs.32,500/- for an original Amtrex air –conditioner and not an assembled air-conditioner. The State Commission has rightly held the petitioner guilty of Unfair Trade Practice as defined under section 2(1) (i) ® of the Consumer Protection Act and consequently, directed the petitioner to compensate the respondent for the same.”
8 In view of above discussion, the present complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to replace the refrigerator in question with same make and model or to refund the price of the refrigerator. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 3,500/- ( Rs. Three Thousand and Five Hundred only) as litigation expenses from both the opposite parties. Opposite Parties are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to record room.
