BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Complaint no. 42 of 2014
Date of Institution: 21.3.2014
Date of Decision: 10.8.2016
Fateh Chand Bansal son of Sh.Ram Sahaemal, r/o Chandni Chowk, Sirsa, now residing at Bawri Wali Gali, Nohria Bazar, Sirsa.
………Complainant.
Versus
- Laxmi Spares, 5 DLF Industrial Area Moti Nagar, New Delhi, Authorized Dealer of Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt.Ltd., through its owner/Prop./Authorized person.
- Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd., 12th Floor, Building no.9, Tower-A, DLF, Cyber City Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002, through its MD/Director/Authorized person.
- M/s Anand Udyog Dabwali Road, Sirsa (being Local Dealer) Authorized Dealer Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd., 12th Floor, Building no.9, Tower-A, DLF, Cyber City Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002, through its owner/Prop.
……… Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……MEMBER.
Present: Sh.N.K.Daroliya, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party no. 1 exparte.
Sh.JBL Garg, Advocate for Op no.2.
Sh.Jagwant Singh, proxy counsel for Sh. J.N.Monga, Advocate for Op no.3.
ORDER
In nutshell, complainant’s case is that he had purchased Daikin Split Air Conditioner of 1.5 Ton from opposite party no. 1 who is the authorized dealer of opposite party no. 2 against cash payment of Rs. 25000/- vide bill no. 877 dated 5.5.2011. At the time of purchase OP no. 1 gave guarantee of one year plus four years warranty against compressor from the date of purchase in all respect of above said Air Conditioner. Now the grievance of the complainant is that since the day of its purchase, the Air Conditioner was giving trouble to the complainant as the same was making hard noise. Complainant approached to op no.1, who got verified the defects in the AC by a mechanic. As alleged, mechanic sent by the OP no. 1 to the house of the complainant found that there is manufacturing defects in the AC and the same is not repairable. Thereafter, the complainant approached to Ops no.1 and 2 and made several complaints for replacement of the AC, but the Ops failed to replace the defective AC as per the given guarantee. Hence this complaint.
2. On notice OPs NO. 2 and 3 appeared through their counsel and contested the case , whereas OP No. 1 proceeded exparte vide order of the Forum dated 24.7.2014. OP No. 2 has replied that the complainant had purchased the AC manufactured by it on 5.5.2011 for which warranty expired after 12 months on 5.5.2012, whereas complaint was made on 3.6.2012 after expiry of warranty period and also the AC was not installed by authorized person against the warranty terms and conditions of the product. Basic problem was that the AC was installed in the shop of complainant and due to frequent opening of doors, dust and heat comes in and due to that the customer was feeling that there was some problem in the AC. Thus the service Engineer recommended re-installation of the unit vide his report dt. 14.6.2013 and after reinstallation the unit was working properly, but the complainant continued to raise complaints at the toll free nos. of op no.2. In order to satisfy the complainant, compressor was replaced with gas charging as well as foam test was done free of cost as per service report dt. 6.7.2013 duly signed by the complainant. Ops also took the plea of breach of warranty terms and conditions on the ground that complainant got installed the AC from un-authorized person. Op also took the preliminary objection regarding territorial jurisdiction of the Forum. Op no.3 simply replied that complainant is not his consumer because there was no transaction between the complainant and op no.3 till date.
3. By way of evidence complainant produced his affidavit Ex. C1, photo copy of bill Ex.C2, details of Toll free nos. Ex. C3, legal notice Ex.C4 and postal receipts Ex.C5 to Ex.C8 whereas the Ops produced their affidavits Ex.RW1, Ex.R2, terms and condition of warranty Ex.R3 and Ex.R4, service reports Ex.R5 and Ex.R6.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully.
5. To decide the case, first question before us is whether the complaint has been filed within the limitation or not? As per the complainant’s version, he purchased the AC on 5.5.2011 and there was problem in the AC since the very beginning i.e. from the very date of its purchase, whereas the present complaint has been filed on 21.3.2014. In view of Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. In this case, cause of action has arisen to the complainant on 5.5.2011 i.e. from the date of purchase of AC. As such, the present complaint has been filed beyond the limitation period of two years. Preliminary objection raised by the Ops regarding territorial jurisdiction of the Forum has no force because of the fact that Ops themselves had given services at the premises of the complainant which is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Forum.
6. Now, coming to the merit of the case, it is the case of the ops that complainant made first complaint after the expiry of the warranty period of one year. Ops also successfully proved that AC has been installed from an unauthorized person, which is breach of the terms and conditions of the warranty card. Moreover, in order to satisfy the complainant, Ops also replaced the compressor with gas charging and foam test was done free of cost as per service report dt. 6.7.2013 duly signed by the complainant. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency on the part of Ops in providing service to the complainant.
7. As such, complaint is hereby dismissed but no order as to costs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties under Sub Rule 9 of Rule 4 of the Haryana Consumer Protection Rules, 2004. File be consigned to the records.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
