Delhi

East Delhi

CC/1119/2013

AUSAF HUSSAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

L.G - Opp.Party(s)

05 Mar 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

 

CC No.1119/2013:

In the matter of :

Sh. Aafaq Hussain

S/o. Sh. Ausaf Hussain

R/o. 9/4928 B/21 – A, Gali No.4 B,

Old Seelampur East,

Delhi – 110 031

Complainant

Vs

1.         L.G. Electronic India Pvt. Ltd.

            A-27, Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Estate,

            Mathura Road, Delhi – 110 044

 

2.         Electronic Craft

                      B – 4, Kanti Nagar Extn.,

Delhi – 110 051

                                                            Respondents

Date of Admission :20/01/2014

                                                                                                                                Date of Order          :16/11/2015

ORDER

Poonam Malhotra, Member :

           

            The present complaint has been filed with the allegation that the complainant purchased a LG Refrigerator Model No. LGREF 205XFDG 5CE from Respondent No.II for Rs. 12,900/-.  It is alleged that within one month of its purchase the said refrigerator stopped working and complaints were lodged on 10/09/2012 & 25/09/2012 vide Complaint Nos. RNA 120910017841 & RNA 120925003109 respectively.  The said refrigerator was replaced after much difficulty but the cooling of the replaced refrigerator also reduced and its compressor started giving noise.  Complaints vide Nos. RNA 121117071462, RNA 121118087478, RNA 131122035966 & RNA 13112308519 were lodged on 17/11/2012, 18/11/2012, 22/11/2013 & 23/11/2013 respectively but in vain.  His complaints were closed on frivolous grounds. It is further alleged that on 14/12/2013 the compressor of the refrigerator was changed on payment of Rs.230/- against Complaint No.RNA 131212066754 dated 12/12/2013but the problem persisted.  It is in these circumstances the complainant has prayed for the refund of Rs.12,900/-, the cost of the refrigerator, and compensation of Rs.40,000/-.

 

            Both the respondents were served with notices.  They put up appearance but written statement filed by only Respondent No.I wherein while admitting the replacement of refrigerator and replacement of the compressor of the replaced refrigerator on 14/12/2013 it has raised the plea of concealment of material facts by the complainant.  It is submitted by the Respondent No.I that it is ready to remove the defect, if any, under the terms &conditions of warranty.  Rest of all the allegations have been denied.

 

            Evidence by way filed by the complainant only wherein besides reaffirming the allegations made in the complaint it is submitted in Para 8 of the said affidavit that after the institution of the present complaint the compressor of the refrigerator had been replaced once again on payment of Rs.230/- on 09/04/2013 in response/retort to the complaint lodged on 06/04/2014 vide Complaint No. 140406017813, copy of which has been filed on record as Exhibit CW – 3 to the affidavit in evidence.

 

            Heard & perused the record.

 

The factum of purchase of a LG Refrigerator Model No. LGREF 205XFDG 5CE for Rs. 12,900/-(Rs.11,466.68 plus VAT Rs.1433.34)vide Retail Invoice No.R1833 dated 16/08/2012 from Respondent No.II is not in dispute.  It is also admitted by the Respondent No.I that the refrigerator originally purchased by the complainant on 16/08/2012 was replaced by it and the compressor of the replaced refrigerator was replaced by it on 14/12/2013 and only Rs.230/- were charged by Respondent No.I for the said job.  Further, neither the allegation made by the complainant in Para 8 of his affidavit in evidence that during the pendency of the present complaint the compressor of the said refrigerator was again replaced on 09/04/2014in response to the complaint lodged on 06/04/2014 vide Complaint No. 140406017813 has been controverted by the Respondent No.I nor it has controverted the fact of charging only Rs.230/- for the replacement job done on 09/04/2014.  It is not the case of the Respondent No.I that the alleged defects in the refrigerator and the replacement of the compressor done by it were not covered by the terms & conditions of the warranty given by it on the said refrigerator.  It is pertinent to mention here that the functioning of the refrigerator is directly dependent upon the ability of the compressor to retreat the gas in the cooling coils so as to give proper and desired cooling. When the compressor is defective the refrigerator will not give the desired cooling. The Respondent No.I has filed its written statement on 25/04/2014 but it has not revealed therein the fact that it had replaced the compressor of the said refrigerator again on 09/04/2014. This certainly amounts to concealment of a fact which is material in deciding the present complaint in a fair and justifiable manner.  In view of the above facts there is no room for doubt that the compressor of the said refrigerator was suffering from defects within the warranty period and despite twice its replacement the Respondent No.I failed to rectify the alleged defects.

 

The complainant has failed to make out any case of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the Respondent No.II.  As such it is exonerated from any liability towards the complainant.

 

            Taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration, we hold the Respondent No.I guilty of providing deficient services to the complainant and direct it to refund Rs.11,467/-, the cost of the refrigerator to him, the VAT of Rs.1,433.34 cannot be refunded as the same is deposited in the Govt.Treasury. Further,it is precisely clear from the factsof the present complaint that the complainant and his family have suffered a lot as they have been deprived of using the refrigerator and enjoying its undeterred services.  The Respondent No.I has infact thrust upon the complainant this unwanted litigation.  We, further, award a compensation of Rs.6,000/- to the complainant and it shall include the cost of this litigation. Let this amount of refund, compensation and cost be paid within 45 days from the date of this order and if not paid, the complainant shall be entitled for interest @ 9% p.a. thereon till it is finally paid.   The complainant shall handover to the Respondent No.I the old refrigerator on receipt of the awarded amount.

            Copy of the order to be sent to all the parties as per rules.

 

(Poonam Malhotra)                                                                                                              (N.A. Zaidi)

          Member                                                                                                                                     President